In one world, we have Claude Mythos, a model “dramatically” better than Opus 4.6 (surely this is AGI and the endgame, right?). In another world, we have the AI bubble bursting. How can these two things both be true?


If you went back in time to 1850 with a smartphone and a photo printer, you could quickly become a millionaire selling photos. You’d be invited to royal dignitaries palaces to photograph them, taking trains and boats all over the world. Today, you couldn’t make $5 on a street corner with those same tools. There are photographers who become millionaires today, but they do it because they push the craft of photography forward – they do something few others can. They can’t just show up with no special skills and commonplace items.

AI doesn’t replace programmers or artists, it raises the bar for them. With AI: You Can Just Build Things, But So Can Everyone Else 🤍

Anything a person without skill can build with AI is worth very little, because anyone else can build that same thing. However, people with skill can use the same tools and build valuable things, many top photographers in the world today use iPhones.


Capability and value are not the same thing. AI can keep getting better super fast, but the value of anything it produces by itself is low. As the tools improve, the floor rises, but the total size of the market doesn’t.

AI is going to be the major hot button issue of the 2028 US election, and I totally get why people hate it. If the market doesn’t grow but the AI companies do, the only way they did that was by taking value from everyone else. People are very right to ask who we are building this for? Oh, to take value from people like me? I thought we lived in a democracy, can we vote to not build it?

I personally love AI just from a pure desire to meet silicon-based life, and I can’t wait for superhuman models that nobody profits from.