It's a weird cycle though where the order of everything is messed up.

The normal tech innovation model is: 1. User problem identified, 2. Technology advancement achieved, 3. Application built to solve problem

With AI, it's turned into: 1. Technology advancement achieved, 2. Applications haphazardly being built to do anything with Technology, 3. Frantic search for users who might want to use applications.

I don't know how the industry thinks they're going to make any money out of the new model.

> With AI, it's turned into: 1. Technology advancement achieved, 2. Applications haphazardly being built to do anything with Technology, 3. Frantic search for users who might want to use applications.

No, it’s always been 1) Utter the current password in your pitch deck to unlock investor dollars. Recently it’s “AI” and “LLM,” but previously it was “Blockchain,” “Big Data,” etc.

I mean the obvious solution is to just manufacture more problems.

I wish I could be certain that we're not doing that already.

In this case, I wouldn't attribute malice to incompetence.

we most certainly are with this subscription era of software. No one had an issue with buying Office or Photoshop or any other product that has no business needing to do monthly update cycles being a "buy once, own until you wanna upgrade". Except executives who wanted to siphon more money out of their products.

Another view is that the Internet exactly matched this model, and that it's much closer to the norm than not: the Internet became available to normal people in the mid-to-late 90s, depending on where you were, but all that was on the web was dumb personal websites (1). In the late 90s bubble, startups seemed pretty crazy, slapping "...but on the Internet" onto basically any idea and raising money off of it (2), basically what's happening with "...but with AI" today. Most failed to find a market because too few people were using the Internet for everything and the frantic search for users failed (3).

But just as the conservative old-school business people were laughing and patting themselves on the back post-bubble over how stupid all the dotcoms were for thinking they could monetize eyeballs, Google emerges, and 20 years later tech companies drive the stock market rather than following it. Don't dismiss a technology just because the birthing spasms look ugly, it takes some time for markets to develop and for products to settle into niches. At the start a lot of that is due to people not being comfortable, tech sucking, and the market shifting too quickly to precisely target, but that can all change pretty fast.

I just wish the workers didn't have to suffer everytime some CEOs decide to experiment with humanity and stakeholders overhype things.