Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Why do you need this persons name?
The implication is that it's a bot saying this, not a person.
AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
21–30 of 189 posts
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#22>>Companies report ‘annualised’ revenue, defined as sum of previous 4 weeks multiplied by 13. why is it multiplied by 13?
[deleted]
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#23You can find the 4 versions of Benedict's deck here: https://www.ben-evans.com/presentations I appreciate the temporal view into this thinking. My interpretation: Nov 2024: Don’t dismiss this; it may be the next platform shift. But the actual questions are still unsettled: scaling, usefulness, deployment, and business model. May 2025: The model layer is already showing signs of commoditization, so the important quest…
I think that DeepSeek may be important to that. They have a really good model that's open source, raising the bar for all other players: how good your model needs to be so you can make meaningful money on it (better than DeepSeek). Same thing happened on other places the open source offering became popular.
What good is an open-weights DeepSeek model if you have nowhere to run it?
OpenAI / Google / Anthropic / XAI also have a ton of compute. That is the real moat.
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#24Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#25>>Companies report ‘annualised’ revenue, defined as sum of previous 4 weeks multiplied by 13. why is it multiplied by 13?
[deleted]
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#26Didn't Ben Evans previously shill for bitcoin, which is now omitted in the graphs for "disruptive technologies"? This is a marketing Gish Gallop talk that pretends to invalidate counterarguments with a couple of fantasy graphs.
[flagged]
not to be too pedantic but sourced doesn't usually mean accurate. sourced can very well be fantasy. it will be a 'sourced fantasy' in that case or hallucination if you used a LLM.
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#27"Chat is a terrible UX General use needs ‘apps’"
I'm old so my computer career has gone: punch cards => calculators => command-line => GUI => touch screen => voice => chat. Chat seems to be the best blend of expressiveness and utility, with a dose of magic thrown in.
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you need this persons name?
The implication is that it's a bot saying this, not a person.
No it isn't. The implication is that pro-AI people can take revenge. He knows he is secure with his opinions. He even paraphrases Andreesen's title "software will eat the world". He has repeatedly appeared at a16z.
It is very secure to be pro-AI while the rest has to resort to unregistered typewriters like in the Soviet Union.
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#29I was a baby when the Internet Revolution happened. I was in high school and college when the Mobile Revolution steamrolled everything. It’s been interesting to see this one, as an adult working in the world. I wonder how far it will go.
Further than the doomers think, but not enough to pay off the investors of the original boom. I say that as someone who has been an early believer in the internet (first website in the 90s), mobile data (slurping down the 'net, IRC, and IMs via EDGE data), smartphones (N80ie), streaming media (RIP Windows MCE), the list goes on.
Models were always going to be the commodity, just like the most popular and viable use cases at present are less job-replacement than "let's analyze huge data sets for patterns we're missing, and adjust accordingly" or "probabilistically generate deterministic software for me for X function/task". One-offs simply aren't profitable when models are interchangeable commodities, hence that brief attempt to pivot to "pay by outcome" before giddily embracing the classic consumption-based-billing playbook.
Re: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
#30Didn't Ben Evans previously shill for bitcoin, which is now omitted in the graphs for "disruptive technologies"? This is a marketing Gish Gallop talk that pretends to invalidate counterarguments with a couple of fantasy graphs.
[flagged]
Yeah, beyond this mumbo-jumbo non-answer of yours, did you or did you not push crypto? Because if you did...it could kind of not speak for your analytical competence.