I'm all with you about the principle i.e. that having the biggest number in a set (whether or not that number is even still minoritary by itself, though that do

I'm all with you about the principle i.e. that having the biggest number in a set (whether or not that number is even still minoritary by itself, though that does make the claim even more ridiculous) doesn't imply being the best let alone a necessity. Otherwise it would boil down to the classic "eat shit, billions of flies can't be wrong". That being said, there are actual factors for which the US might indeed plausibly be the best location choice specifically for most AI companies in the current hype context. For example funding: * while there is also some proportion of actually promising sustainable business models based on AI, the fact is that a very large proportion of AI companies are surfing on a hype/bubble and have somewhat of an exit strategy (e.g. being bought by some bigger player) but not a business model that would otherwise sustainably stand on its own feet. * the US is arguably indeed the best location for most high-risk ventures in need of big funding… including and especially so for hype/bubble surfers. Nowhere else can you find that much early investment money with such a willingness to take risks and to ride a hype/bubble. For most AI companies, the US as a location means they are able to raise more at a better (for the founders) valuation.