Wer gewinnt KI?
Der kanadische Ökonom Joshua Gans schreibt in seinem Newsletter:
Instead, who “won” the Internet? The answer, mostly, was Google. Not even Microsoft — the other target for regulatory attention to protect the Internet — featured. Facebook and Apple were winners as well but for other stuff, not the core Internet. The point here is that Google didn’t exist when we were running around protecting the Internet from monopoly.
So why did Google win? The answer is it won by doing the things that all winners of a new technology economy do: they solved the biggest problem with that new technology. In the case of the Internet, it was information overload. The Internet dumped a ton of information into public availability but I even remember back in 1994 struggling to work out where the good and relevant stuff was. Lots of others tried to organise the Internet but Google really solved it. Without Google Search, the Internet was barely usable as an information source.
None of the current identified complementary assets solve the biggest problem with AI. And what is that problem? Buggered if I know. If I did, I wouldn’t be writing a frigging substack that’s for sure. There are plenty of contenders. There’s hallucinations, safety, AIs talking to one another, etc. All of those are problems to be solved. But which one is THE problem? History tells us that firm will win the AI economy. History also tells us that right now, it is not obvious what the winning problem, let alone the solution, is.
This doesn’t rule out one of the current players winning the AI economy. But history tells us they are unlikely to be the winners either. There is something about critiquing your own investments and rationales that makes it hard for them to see the real problem let alone implement the solution. Remember even the firms like Yahoo and LookSmart who were dealing with information overload, didn’t understand that their role was to help people find information and then let them leave their website. The right answer conflicted with the money that was flowing in.
Hier der ganze Text auf seinem Substack: