Intel's team viewed their first microprocessor as an incremental improvement for building calculators, not a world-changing invention. The true revolution was sparked by outsiders who applied the technology in unforeseen ways, like building the first personal computers. This highlights that creators often cannot predict the true impact of their inventions.

Related Insights

Even revolutionary ideas can be crippled by self-doubt. Kate Raworth sketched her now-famous "donut" diagram and immediately dismissed it as "fluffy and fuzzy," hiding it in a desk drawer for months. This reveals the vulnerability innovators feel and the courage required to share a concept that breaks from convention.

Unlike traditional engineering, breakthroughs in foundational AI research often feel binary. A model can be completely broken until a handful of key insights are discovered, at which point it suddenly works. This "all or nothing" dynamic makes it impossible to predict timelines, as you don't know if a solution is a week or two years away.

A technology like AI can create immense societal value without generating wealth for its early investors or creators. The value can be captured by consumers through lower prices or by large incumbents who leverage the technology. Distinguishing between value creation and value capture is critical for investment analysis.

History shows that transformative innovations like airlines, vaccines, and PCs, while beneficial to society, often fail to create sustained, concentrated shareholder value as they become commoditized. This suggests the massive valuations in AI may be misplaced, with the technology's benefits accruing more to users than investors in the long run.

The most profound innovations in history, like vaccines, PCs, and air travel, distributed value broadly to society rather than being captured by a few corporations. AI could follow this pattern, benefiting the public more than a handful of tech giants, especially with geopolitical pressures forcing commoditization.

Visionary creators are often tortured by their own success. By the time a product launches, they are already deep into developing its superior successor and can only see the current version's flaws. This constant dissatisfaction is the engine of relentless innovation, as seen with Walt Disney.

Luckey's invention method involves researching historical concepts discarded because enabling technology was inadequate. With modern advancements, these old ideas become powerful breakthroughs. The Oculus Rift's success stemmed from applying modern GPUs to a 1980s NASA technique that was previously too computationally expensive.

Google authored the seminal 'Transformers' AI paper but failed to capitalize on it, allowing outsiders to build the next wave of AI. This shows how incumbents can be so 'lost in the sauce' of their current paradigm that they don't notice when their own research creates a fundamental shift.

Society celebrates figures like Edison for the 'idea' of the lightbulb, but his real breakthrough was in manufacturing a practical version. Similarly, Elon Musk's genius is arguably in revolutionizing manufacturing to lower space travel costs, a feat of logistics often overlooked in favor of visionary narratives.

Many technical leaders initially dismissed generative AI for its failures on simple logical tasks. However, its rapid, tangible improvement over a short period forces a re-evaluation and a crucial mindset shift towards adoption to avoid being left behind.