“Your life, as it has been, is over. From this time forward, you will service
us.” If you ever watched Star Trek: The Next Generation, you probably remember
those words…



<[link removed]>



Сⅼіϲkhеrе and I'll reveal the shocking details.
<[link removed]>



Editor’s Note: AI is spreading nearly twice as fast as the internet – and
Porter believes it could create a brutal wealth divide between the people who
profit from this revolution and those it leaves behind.

In his recent broadcast, he sits down with tech expert Luke Lango to reveal
how to position your money before that divide becomes permanent.

Go here to watch it now.
<[link removed]>


“Your life, as it has been, is over.
From this time forward, you will service us.”
If you ever watched Star Trek: The Next Generation, you probably remember
those words…

Spoken by Captain Jean-Luc Picard after he has been assimilated by the Borg –
his face disfigured and his voice drained of all human emotion.

The Borg – a collective machine intelligence – are frightening because they
do not threaten or argue. Their assimilation of all life in the universe is
simply an inevitability.

That scene has been on my mind lately because it is about as good a metaphor
as I know for theunstoppable spread of artificial intelligence.
<[link removed]>

Not because machines are about to turn us into mindless servants (we already
have TikTok for that)... but because AI is advancing without any need for
public agreement or approval. It has reached a Borg-like inevitability.

It’s not waiting for Washington to make up its mind or for the average
American to decide whether any of this is a good idea.

Once software or a machine can perform useful work at a fraction of the cost,
its adoption becomes an inevitable economic compulsion.

And the speed with which it is tearing through our civilization is staggering.

A study from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis found that 39% of
Americans between the ages of 18 and 64 had used generative AI within roughly
two years of its mass-market introduction.

At the comparable point, internet adoption was around 20%. The internet took
approximately five years to reach the level AI reached us in less than two.

Until now, nothing in our lifetimes had spread as quickly as the internet.
Based on the adoption data cited above, AI is moving nearly twice as fast.

<[link removed]>
Many investors will look at that curve and conclude that it’s time to dump a
load of cash into AI stocks.

But that’s where the trouble begins – because recognizing an inevitable
technology is not the same thing as understandingwho will make money from it.
<[link removed]>
Stranded on the wrong side of history
In 1975, a Kodak engineer named Steve Sasson built the first self-contained
digital camera. It weighed eight pounds, required 23 seconds to record a
black-and-white image, and stored the result on a cassette tape.

Sure, the device was crude, but its potential impact was enormous. Kodak’s
own engineer had invented a future in which people would no longer need film.

The management understood that potential perfectly well – and it terrified
them. Because Kodak’s very existence depended on selling film. So, the company
spent years defending the economics that its own invention was destroying.

By the time digital photography became impossible to resist, Kodak had lost
both the habit and the ability to adapt. It entered bankruptcy in 2012.

Blockbuster had even less of an excuse to get steamrolled by technology. In
2000, Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph offered to sell Netflix to Blockbuster
for $50 million. The Blockbuster executives reportedly struggled not to laugh.

Roughly a decade later, Blockbuster was bankrupt and Netflix was fast
becoming the new distribution system for filmed entertainment. That was one of
the more expensive chuckles in business history.

The internet boom taught me that history acts without mercy to people who can
see a technological change in front of them but continue on in futility,
unwilling to accept or embrace it.

In hindsight, the rise of the online world was obviously unstoppable.

Yet even some of the most respected publications of the day were deeply
skeptical of the companies at the frontier.

In May 1999, Barron’s famously ran a cover story titled “Amazon.bomb,”
declaring:“Investors are beginning to realize that this storybook stock has
problems.”

I recommended Amazon two months before Barron’s ran that story. I saw
something different I guess. I saw that Amazon had an undeniable business
model. The shares have since risen more than 7,000%.

Years later, after using Shopify to operate one of my own businesses, our
research recommended the stock in March 2016. We closed the position 18 months
later with a 256% gain.

My interest in Bitcoin came from the same basic observation. The internet had
created a genuinely scarce digital asset that could move around the world
without relying on the traditional financial system.

These were very different investments, and the best examples of what can
happen when everything goes right for us. I’m not claiming that happens every
time. And, of course, past performance doesn’t tell us what will happen in the
future.

But the question was always the same simple one: What becomes more valuable
because this technology exists?

That is the question investors must answer about AI right now.
Betting on the inevitable
AI technology (in many different forms) will touch practically every company
in America. But it will not reward all of them equally.

Enormous sums – trillions of dollars – are already pouring into
semiconductors and the power-hungry data centers required to run the models.

Some businesses will turn that colossal buildout into decades of cash flow
and investment returns for shareholders.

A great many more will discover that spending money on an indispensable
technology does not make the spender indispensable.

The Great AI Divide
<[link removed]>
will not be between people whobelieve in AI and people who do not. It will be
between those who own the scarce, profitable parts of this new economy and
those whose livelihoods are being repriced by it.

That’s why I recorded this sit-down with Luke Lango,
<[link removed]>
one of the best technology investors I know. Luke recommended AMD in 2015, and
he has spent years studying how these technological shifts create – and destroy
– fortunes.

In our critical broadcast,
<[link removed]>
Luke and I explain where we believe the durable economics of AI will appear
and why several of today’s most popular stocks may disappoint their investors.

We also reveal the name and ticker of a little-known spin-off from a
century-old American business that we believe could become crucial to the
data-center buildout.

Watch my critical broadcast in full today.
<[link removed]>

The Borg were right: resistance is futile. So, for investors, the only useful
question that remains is this:

Will your capital be positioned before or after AI completely takes over the
world?

Good investing,

Porter Stansberry

 
Power Field Notes

Crude Up, Diesel Down: The Split That Defined Friday
A revealing divergence closed the week: heating oil fell as much as 5% after
settlement, dragging part of the energy complex lower, while crude itself held
near $104 — a split that clarified what is driving the current rally.The Hormuz
and hurricane risks are about crude supply, not diesel, so when the immediate
diesel panic eased, heating oil could fall sharply even as crude held firm.
The two fuels, usually moving together, diverged because the drivers were
specific to crude. The split also reflects a deeper dynamic noted by analysts:
fewer refined products are exiting Hormuz than crude, as the world starts to
run short of stopgaps such as strategic reserves to manage the crisis ahead of
winter. For now, the crude-specific risks — the mines, the hurricane, the
attacks — are holding crude up even as the products complex wobbles, a reminder
that the rally is being driven by supply threats to the barrel itself. For the
American investor at or near retirement, the crude-diesel split is a useful
diagnostic: it shows the current rally is grounded in crude-supply fears rather
than the diesel tightness that drove earlier moves, which means the price
direction from here depends on the Hormuz and hurricane developments more than
on the distillate market.

■ OVERVIEW · The split Heating oil fell up to 5% after settlement while crude
held near $104 — the two fuels diverged

■ ANALYSIS · The explanation The Hormuz and hurricane risks are about crude
supply, not diesel · crude-specific drivers held the barrel firm

■ OUTLOOK · The picture The rally is grounded in crude-supply fears — the
direction depends on Hormuz and the hurricane more than the distillate market

“fewer refined products are exiting Hormuz than crude, as the world starts to
run short of stopgaps” — Oil Monitor weekly analysis, October 10, 2026

■ Historical Context · When Crude and Products Diverge

2008Crude spiked to $147 while some product cracks lagged — the divergence
signalled the crude-specific, speculative nature of the final run-up.

2022Diesel led crude in the Ukraine shock; when diesel panic eased, the
complex re-sorted — the lead fuel reveals the true driver.

NowCrude holding while heating oil falls 5% shows the rally is
crude-supply-driven — the barrel, not the distillate, is leading.

Sources: Oil Monitor Weekly, October 10, 2026 · Trading Economics / Brent,
October 11, 2026 · Energy Aspects, October 2026

 


<[link removed]>

[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> is on Power Field
Notes <[link removed]> list because you opted in before the crowd
caught on.

If we go quiet — look in promotions, updates, or wherever your inbox files
things it hasn't figured out yet.

Unsubscribe
<[link removed]>
. We'll part ways cleanly.

If something's off, you can reach us here <mailto:[email protected]>.

Privacy Policy. <[link removed]>

254 Chapman Rd Ste 208 Newark 📍 Delaware 19702, United States.


© 2026 Alpha One Marketers LLC. All rights reserved.