I read this today and found it thought provoking...*warning - its very long"
It argues that AI may not be the game winner. "America is systematically overemphasizing the role AI will play in the future and underestimating the role that electrification will play."
In fact, it argues "China is open sourcing intelligence" in order to commoditize AI which will only be a single layer of the "electric stack" that will shape the future - power, motors, batteries and embedded computation and intelligence.
"Per Clayton Christensen’s Law of Conservation of Attractive Profits, if intelligence becomes commoditized, profits will move to adjacent layers of the value chain, like the electric product in which that intelligence lives. A robot with a commoditized brain may capture more of the profits in the value chain than the brains themselves, particularly if open source models get good enough.
To be blunt: in the Electric Era, maintaining design leadership without manufacturing leadership is not a coherent strategic position, and one that gets less coherent the better you believe AI will get."
How this relates to investing may vary greatly, but it makes a pretty compelling case similar to Andrew's musing on open-source email servers back in the early internet days. It changed the game, but was quickly commoditised and not a very good investment cue overall.
Also... Its just a matter of time before you all have EVs, In-home Power Plants, and Robots. Don't fight it!
I’ve posted before about AI agents superseding humans in coding, and how the cost of software development, including enterprise/large-scale, is trending towards zero, I can't find that forum post to add to, hence starting a new one.
Anyhow, I have come across the latest results from the 2025 International Collegiate Programming Contest (ICPC) World Finals in Astana, Kazakhstan really put it in perspective. Google’s Gemini Deep Think solved 10 of the 12 problems under the same five, hour limit as human teams (starting 10 minutes later, no less). If it had been ranked, it would have placed second overall, which is against the very best university teams in the world.
Around the same time, both Gemini and an OpenAI research,grade ChatGPT model took on the 2025 International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO), and each scored at gold,medal level, solving 5 out of 6 problems (35/42 points). That’s the kind of score usually reserved for the absolute top human contestants.
For now, the real opportunity is figuring out how to work alongside these AI programming experts while we humans still add value. How long we add value for, well, that’s an open question.
I guess in terms of investments, what does literally on,demand software mean for your investments? From my perspective, it is all about networks and the like, there simply won't be a competitive advantage in having the best software.