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.
Related Insights
Unlike previous tech waves that trickled down from large institutions, AI adoption is inverted. Individuals are the fastest adopters, followed by small businesses, with large corporations and governments lagging. This reverses the traditional power dynamic of technology access and creates new market opportunities.
The democratization of technology via AI shifts the entrepreneurial goalpost. Instead of focusing on creating a handful of billion-dollar "unicorns," the more impactful ambition is to empower millions of people to each build a million-dollar "donkey corn" business, truly broadening economic opportunity.
New technologies perceived as job-destroying, like AI, face significant public and regulatory risk. A powerful defense is to make the general public owners of the technology. When people have a financial stake in a technology's success, they are far more likely to defend it than fight against it.
During major platform shifts like AI, it's tempting to project that companies will capture all the value they create. However, competitive forces ensure the vast majority of productivity gains (the "surplus") flows to end-users, not the technology creators.
![David George - Building a16z Growth, Investing Across the AI Stack, and Why Markets Misprice Growth - [Invest Like the Best, EP.450] thumbnail](https://megaphone.imgix.net/podcasts/8da7dbd8-ceeb-11f0-941c-ef83bcdd4c9f/image/d44107bc94719f78fbe91befb141073e.jpg?ixlib=rails-4.3.1&max-w=3000&max-h=3000&fit=crop&auto=format,compress)
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.
The enormous market caps of leading AI companies can only be justified by finding trillions of dollars in efficiencies. This translates directly into a required labor destruction of roughly 10 million jobs, or 12.5% of the vulnerable workforce, suggesting market turmoil or mass unemployment is inevitable.
Despite broad, bipartisan public opposition to AI due to fears of job loss and misinformation, corporations and investors are rushing to adopt it. This push is not fueled by consumer demand but by a 'FOMO-driven gold rush' for profits, creating a dangerous disconnect between the technology's backers and the society it impacts.
Unlike traditional SaaS where high switching costs prevent price wars, the AI market faces a unique threat. The portability of prompts and reliance on interchangeable models could enable rapid commoditization. A price war could be "terrifying" and "brutal" for the entire ecosystem, posing a significant downside risk.
For the first time, a disruptive technology's most advanced capabilities are available to the public from day one via consumer apps. An individual with a smartphone has access to the same state-of-the-art AI as a top VC or Fortune 500 CEO, making it the most democratic technology in history.
Conventional venture capital wisdom of 'winner-take-all' may not apply to AI applications. The market is expanding so rapidly that it can sustain multiple, fast-growing, highly valuable companies, each capturing a significant niche. For VCs, this means huge returns don't necessarily require backing a monopoly.
