No. The aggregate is useless. What matters is the 5% that have positive return.
In the first few years of any new technology, most people investing it lose money because the transition and experimentation costs are higher than the initial returns.
But as time goes on, best practices emerge, investments get paid off, and steady profits emerge.
No, on the consumer end. The whole point is that the 5% profitable is going to turn to 10%, 25%, 50%, 75% as companies work out how to use AI profitably.
It always takes time to figure out how to profitably utilize any technological improvement and pay off the upfront costs. This is no exception.
Can we both at least agree that 95% of comapnies investing and failing in a technology with 400b+ dollars of investment constitutes a bubble popping? I pretty much agree with you otherwise and that is what the article comes down to as well:
>I believe both sides are right. Like the 19th century railroads and the 20th century broadband Internet build-out, AI will rise first, crash second, and eventually change the world.
In the first few years of any new technology, most people investing it lose money because the transition and experimentation costs are higher than the initial returns.
But as time goes on, best practices emerge, investments get paid off, and steady profits emerge.