The narrative crisis you're describing has an infrastructure problem underneath it. The biggest players can't tell honest stories about the future because their governance depends on one person's judgment, and that person's incentives shift based on who they're talking to.
Startups have a narrative advantage partly because they haven't built the kind of leadership-dependent architecture that forces the double-speak.
Nail. Head. Especially on the AI polling part. I get IPOs are around the corner but it seems like a poor way to get others aboard the hype train.
I’ve said that there’s a disconnect between what it’s being pitched as and what it can actually do.
The marketing from LLM lab CEOs - the doomerism doesn’t help (à la “AI will take peoples jobs within __ months/years”). No wonder AI in the USA is polling so badly that even ICE polls above it with all the madness going on. I personally don’t believe the doomerism that everyone seems to be eating up so much.
Me neither...I actually find the doomer stories (i.e. human labor will be replaced with agents) kind of lazy?! The future will be far more interesting.
I feel like we’re primed for a return to Steve Jobs-style product builders. Not the toxic side, but the mature, humanist side from after his return to Apple.
I'm so with you! I even had a section about that in this essay, but it felt like cramming too much in. We need someone to take on the role of translating this wave of innovation to a broader audience in a way that's accessible and inspiring.
How? Is this a joke I really can't believe you think this 'innovation' is inspiring anyone but the public markets. All this desperate psy ops has done is move public markets. There ins't credible adoption relative to hype. And Steve Jobs... was about users. Current tech and frankly the architecture of AI infra and apps as they stand is about removing agency from users. It's the exact opposite MO. The GCC countries will stop funding SV and THAT is when truth will emerge again. Once the bubble pops. Not before.
Refreshing that there are at least some VCs who care about this!
There are rarely days when I don't think about how we primed an entire generation against growth and technological progress. I think a sizable chunk of the blame -- although not all of it -- does lie on the SF tech class and the many mistakes of the last decade and a half, and I can't help but feel that we are making the same mistakes again :/
Let's say a founder is interested in advancing positive use cases of AI as a commercial or even enterprise product, who should they reach out to?
Respectfully the tech industry's self image is completely at odds with what it actually DOES to the world of today. It's truly mind-boggling that you think the world is waiting for tech leadership to do tell us about the future when it has been working dilligently to DESTROY the future for billions of people. Tech has transformed into an industry that gloats at war, death and destruction and punishes ANYONE who dares to speak up. Until Tech stops licking Peter Thiel's balls nothing is going to change. The only thing that can save tech is the collapse of the AI bubble. THAT is when these whiny lawless MFs will deal with the real world.
Great piece Ashley, very timely. The entire valley seems to be going in a spiral of 'engagement maxxing'
Social engagement-induced psychosis
The narrative crisis you're describing has an infrastructure problem underneath it. The biggest players can't tell honest stories about the future because their governance depends on one person's judgment, and that person's incentives shift based on who they're talking to.
Startups have a narrative advantage partly because they haven't built the kind of leadership-dependent architecture that forces the double-speak.
So true. The stories we tell about what's possible shape what actually gets built. More founders need to hear this.
Nail. Head. Especially on the AI polling part. I get IPOs are around the corner but it seems like a poor way to get others aboard the hype train.
I’ve said that there’s a disconnect between what it’s being pitched as and what it can actually do.
The marketing from LLM lab CEOs - the doomerism doesn’t help (à la “AI will take peoples jobs within __ months/years”). No wonder AI in the USA is polling so badly that even ICE polls above it with all the madness going on. I personally don’t believe the doomerism that everyone seems to be eating up so much.
Me neither...I actually find the doomer stories (i.e. human labor will be replaced with agents) kind of lazy?! The future will be far more interesting.
I feel like we’re primed for a return to Steve Jobs-style product builders. Not the toxic side, but the mature, humanist side from after his return to Apple.
I'm so with you! I even had a section about that in this essay, but it felt like cramming too much in. We need someone to take on the role of translating this wave of innovation to a broader audience in a way that's accessible and inspiring.
How? Is this a joke I really can't believe you think this 'innovation' is inspiring anyone but the public markets. All this desperate psy ops has done is move public markets. There ins't credible adoption relative to hype. And Steve Jobs... was about users. Current tech and frankly the architecture of AI infra and apps as they stand is about removing agency from users. It's the exact opposite MO. The GCC countries will stop funding SV and THAT is when truth will emerge again. Once the bubble pops. Not before.
🔔🔔🔔
Refreshing that there are at least some VCs who care about this!
There are rarely days when I don't think about how we primed an entire generation against growth and technological progress. I think a sizable chunk of the blame -- although not all of it -- does lie on the SF tech class and the many mistakes of the last decade and a half, and I can't help but feel that we are making the same mistakes again :/
Let's say a founder is interested in advancing positive use cases of AI as a commercial or even enterprise product, who should they reach out to?
Agreed. But do any tech founders have the imagination to go beyond "ai replaces x" to "ai creates x"? Any ideas beyond 60's sci-fi books?
This line jumped out for us:
“Who wins if you win?”
We’ll go first.
If our substack wins, women win.
Respectfully the tech industry's self image is completely at odds with what it actually DOES to the world of today. It's truly mind-boggling that you think the world is waiting for tech leadership to do tell us about the future when it has been working dilligently to DESTROY the future for billions of people. Tech has transformed into an industry that gloats at war, death and destruction and punishes ANYONE who dares to speak up. Until Tech stops licking Peter Thiel's balls nothing is going to change. The only thing that can save tech is the collapse of the AI bubble. THAT is when these whiny lawless MFs will deal with the real world.