I cover the future, and I want to argue about it with you.

The problem

The pace is the problem. Every week an AI lab ships something, a rocket flies, a chip launches, a chart goes vertical. The coverage splits into two useless piles. One says everything is a miracle. The other says everything is the end. Both are easier to write than the truth, and both leave you with a feeling instead of an understanding.

The stance

Here is the bias I will be upfront about. The crowd is often wrong, and legacy media is often most wrong of all. When the entire room agrees on something obvious about technology, the opposite is frequently closer to the truth. People said the internet was a fad. People said smartphones were toys. Today the consensus says AI ends work. I think the more likely story is the one nobody is selling. New kinds of jobs that do not exist yet, stronger economies, and demand for human work we cannot picture from here.

I hold that view loosely and honestly. It runs straight into the people actually building this. Elon Musk says work will become optional. Dario Amodei warns about what happens to jobs. These are not pundits. They are the builders, and the easiest way to predict the future is to build it, so I take them seriously. I just do not take them as settled. When someone says work will be optional, the right response is not applause or panic. It is a better question. Optional for whom. On what timeline. Paid how. That is the work Alex Prompts does.

The method

Every issue runs the same way.

• Inform clearly. What actually happened, in plain English. No jargon, no hype, no doom. You leave understanding the trajectory, not just the headline.
• Read the builders. We take the people building the future at their word, then pressure-test it. The easiest way to predict the future is to build it, so we start with what the builders are actually saying.
• Steelman the skeptic. The strongest version of the other side, argued honestly before we land anywhere. The crowd, and legacy media, are confidently wrong often enough that the consensus is worth doubting.
• A grounded take, then a prompt. A clear, logical read on what it means. Not investment advice. Then the simple, hard question worth arguing about, because the point is to start the conversation.

Why “Prompts”

The name is a double meaning. The AI prompts, and prompting real discussion. Every article, video, and post is built to do one thing. Ask a simple question that turns out to be hard, the kind that gets the most opinionated person in the room to actually say what they think. I am not here to hand you a conclusion. I am here to give you the facts, the strongest version of every side, my honest read, and then the question worth arguing about.

None of this is investment advice. It is a grounded belief that groundbreaking technology is how new work, new industries, and stronger economies get made, paired with a refusal to pretend the hard parts are not real.

What I cover

Anthropic, OpenAI, Google DeepMind, xAI, Meta AI, Nvidia, Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, and the others actually moving the frontier.

How it works

Short clips during the week on the platforms you already scroll. The full story lands in your inbox once a week. The newsletter is free. The clips are how you find me. The inbox is how you go deep.