I think in basic you are right. The thing is, what happens when technology actually overtakes entire services in stead of just a part of it. Maybe I misunderstood. My reasoning is that carriages (I know, product) eventually got replaced by cars because it was cheaper and more convenient. It took a while, but eventually it happened. If something can be done cheaper, faster and with the same quality, it will replace the previous. Is this a bad thing? Don't know. I know that it is probably not a big problem, new services will rise. We as a species are very resourceful and will find new ways to service the world.
The cost of a replacement for a human is based on the supply of human replacements. The marginal cost for software is close to zero. The marginal cost of human-sized increments of AI is higher than zero, but still only a fraction of the cost of a human. So, you're absolutely right.
I think you are 10% right. I am not confident that a human inside sales rep is worth the rest of the 90% salary I pay them, when I can replace most of what they do at 10% of the cost. They build relationships with customers, they follow up, they schedule demos, they speak to product capability… all of what an agent can do at a fraction of their salary.
Humans will become a market of specialized skill providers. Uniquely positioned across many organizations as the human in the loop when their agents need them.
In my mind it is inevitable. AI will be deflationary at first, but has the potential to become infinitely inflationary. Organizations will pay whatever they need to pay, as long as the return is higher. When returns become more predictable, so will the costs. And the 90% gap starts to shrink.
I think in basic you are right. The thing is, what happens when technology actually overtakes entire services in stead of just a part of it. Maybe I misunderstood. My reasoning is that carriages (I know, product) eventually got replaced by cars because it was cheaper and more convenient. It took a while, but eventually it happened. If something can be done cheaper, faster and with the same quality, it will replace the previous. Is this a bad thing? Don't know. I know that it is probably not a big problem, new services will rise. We as a species are very resourceful and will find new ways to service the world.
Agreed. Abundance over replacement.
Abundance creates new services that humans use AI as a copilot with
The cost of a replacement for a human is based on the supply of human replacements. The marginal cost for software is close to zero. The marginal cost of human-sized increments of AI is higher than zero, but still only a fraction of the cost of a human. So, you're absolutely right.
Great stuff. Keep up the good work.
Why not OpenSource GodMode?
I think it has lots of potential to be successful, let it grow in the background.
Ppl want better than Apollo -- but not pay more than them.
That's the charm of a new company/product -- disrupts the market.
Great post, well argued. Thanks.
I think you are 10% right. I am not confident that a human inside sales rep is worth the rest of the 90% salary I pay them, when I can replace most of what they do at 10% of the cost. They build relationships with customers, they follow up, they schedule demos, they speak to product capability… all of what an agent can do at a fraction of their salary.
Humans will become a market of specialized skill providers. Uniquely positioned across many organizations as the human in the loop when their agents need them.
In my mind it is inevitable. AI will be deflationary at first, but has the potential to become infinitely inflationary. Organizations will pay whatever they need to pay, as long as the return is higher. When returns become more predictable, so will the costs. And the 90% gap starts to shrink.