The bets are placed because if this tech really keeps scaling for the next few years, only the ones who bet today will be left standing.
If the tech stops scaling, whatever we have today is still useful and in some domains revolutionary.
If the tech stops scaling, whatever we have today is still useful and in some domains revolutionary.
* PCs (how are Altair and Commodore doing? also Apple ultimately lost the desktop battle until they managed to attack it from the iPod and iPhone angle)
* search engines (Altavista, Excite, etc)
* social networks (Friendster, MySpace, Orkut)
* smartphones (Nokia, all Windows CE devices, Blackberry, etc)
The list is endless. First mover advantage is strong but overrated. Apple has been building a huge business based on watching what others do and building a better product market fit.
I'm not sure, why must it be so? In cell-phones we have Apple and Android-phones. In OSes we have Linux, Windows, and Apple.
In search-engines we used to have just Google. But what would be the reason to assume that AI must similarly coalesce to a single winner-take-all? And now AI agents are much providing an alternative to Google.
And then described a bunch of winners in a winner take all market. Do you see many people trying to revive any of the apple/android alternatives or starting a new one?
Such a market doesn't have to end up in a monopoly that gets broken up. Plenty of rather sticky duopolies or otherwise severely consolidated markets and the like out there.