Mostly agree but with one big exception. The real issue seems to be that the figuring out part is happening a bit too late. A bit like burn a few hundred billion dollars [0] first ask questions later!?
Is it fair to categorize that it is a pyramid like scheme but with a twist at the top where there are a few (more than a one) genuine wins and winners?
No, it's more like a winner take all market, where a few winners will capture most of the value, and those who sit on the sidelines until everything is figured out are left fighting over the scraps.
* 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.
Yes, exactly! These are all examples of markets where a handful of winners (or sometimes only one) have emerged by investing large amounts of money in developing the technology, leaving everyone else behind.
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.
>I'm not sure, why must it be so? In cell-phones...
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.
[0] - https://hai.stanford.edu/ai-index/2025-ai-index-report/econo...