AI is going to be very disruptive, right? At this point, I think it is pretty clear to most that the answer is yes, almost regardless of what industry you're in. But is it going to be really disruptive? Like disruptive in the Clayton Christensen sense of the word. (Christensen is known for coining the term "disruptive innovation", which he contrasted against "sustaining innovation.")

This is a good question, and I like how Ben Thompson thought about it in his newsletter this morning:

I tend to believe that disruptive innovations are actually quite rare, but when they come, they are basically impossible for the incumbent company to respond to: their business models, shareholders, and most important customers make it impossible for management to respond. If that is true, though, then an incumbent responding is in fact evidence that an innovation is actually not disruptive, but sustaining.

The point he is making is that given that the big tech companies (and of course everyone else) are all now responding to AI by incorporating it into their businesses, it, by definition, must not be a disruptive innovation. It's a sustaining one. This doesn't mean that AI won't have significant impacts on our economy; it just means that maybe it won't put a company like Alphabet out of business.

I thought this was an interesting way of looking at things because it is a reminder that "disruptive innovations" often start out at the bottom of the market. They start in a way that can feel innocuous to incumbents; that is, until they move upmarket. But this is not at all how AI feels. As soon as you play around with ChatGPT you immediately think to yourself, "holy shit, this thing can do my job."

That is obviously something very meaningful. But is it going to shake up the big tech world order? I don't know, if you follow Christensen's definition, crypto sounds like the more disruptive innovation.

I just learned about Blackbird's technology platform and the restaurant loyalty program that they are currently building. On the surface, the way it works is that you walk into a restaurant and then tap your phone on one of their NFC-enabled chips (see above).

This then signals that you are/were there and so you earn loyalty points, kind of like a stamp on one of those cards in the food court. Except here, the idea is to create an endless and customizable array of wonderful customer experiences.

Maybe after 15 fifteen visits you're now considered "fam" (decided by the restaurant), and so you get a designated table at the restaurant and your favorite dessert automatically sent to your home on your birthday. This is just one example.

At the same time, you also earn $FLY, which is the platform's native crypto token (built on Base by Coinbase). And this to me is one of the most exciting aspects of the platform.

Because here is a crypto or web3 product that is seemingly really easy to use. In fact, nobody needs to know that it is doing things on a blockchain. Just tap your phone on the thingy. Earn stuff. And move on.

So I think it's a really good example of where we're headed in this space. The underlying technologies are going to recede into the background and all that we'll see are useful products and services.

AI is going to be very disruptive, right? At this point, I think it is pretty clear to most that the answer is yes, almost regardless of what industry you're in. But is it going to be really disruptive? Like disruptive in the Clayton Christensen sense of the word. (Christensen is known for coining the term "disruptive innovation", which he contrasted against "sustaining innovation.")

This is a good question, and I like how Ben Thompson thought about it in his newsletter this morning:

I tend to believe that disruptive innovations are actually quite rare, but when they come, they are basically impossible for the incumbent company to respond to: their business models, shareholders, and most important customers make it impossible for management to respond. If that is true, though, then an incumbent responding is in fact evidence that an innovation is actually not disruptive, but sustaining.

The point he is making is that given that the big tech companies (and of course everyone else) are all now responding to AI by incorporating it into their businesses, it, by definition, must not be a disruptive innovation. It's a sustaining one. This doesn't mean that AI won't have significant impacts on our economy; it just means that maybe it won't put a company like Alphabet out of business.

I thought this was an interesting way of looking at things because it is a reminder that "disruptive innovations" often start out at the bottom of the market. They start in a way that can feel innocuous to incumbents; that is, until they move upmarket. But this is not at all how AI feels. As soon as you play around with ChatGPT you immediately think to yourself, "holy shit, this thing can do my job."

That is obviously something very meaningful. But is it going to shake up the big tech world order? I don't know, if you follow Christensen's definition, crypto sounds like the more disruptive innovation.

I just learned about Blackbird's technology platform and the restaurant loyalty program that they are currently building. On the surface, the way it works is that you walk into a restaurant and then tap your phone on one of their NFC-enabled chips (see above).

This then signals that you are/were there and so you earn loyalty points, kind of like a stamp on one of those cards in the food court. Except here, the idea is to create an endless and customizable array of wonderful customer experiences.

Maybe after 15 fifteen visits you're now considered "fam" (decided by the restaurant), and so you get a designated table at the restaurant and your favorite dessert automatically sent to your home on your birthday. This is just one example.

At the same time, you also earn $FLY, which is the platform's native crypto token (built on Base by Coinbase). And this to me is one of the most exciting aspects of the platform.

Because here is a crypto or web3 product that is seemingly really easy to use. In fact, nobody needs to know that it is doing things on a blockchain. Just tap your phone on the thingy. Earn stuff. And move on.

So I think it's a really good example of where we're headed in this space. The underlying technologies are going to recede into the background and all that we'll see are useful products and services.