It's basically the same reason why Apple didn't create every app in the App Store. No single company can be specialised in everything, and more importantly, selling tokens is risk-free money since they get a cut for every app without taking any business risk.
I think that’s a different argument. Apple absolutely “copies” hugely successful, durable apps. Just read about “getting sherlocked”. The rest of the apps are transient, niche and it’s easier to just harvest your cut of ads/payments.
Fair point about Sherlocking, but that's actually proves the analogy. Apple only "Sherlocks" broad, consumer-facing features, but they never touch specialised B2B or super niche software. AI model providers are doing the same thing. They build the broad stuff themselves, like AI inside Excel or PowerPoint, but they live the crazy stuff to other companies.
Yeah, actually trying to specialize in everything constraints the firm's growth. Though diversifying can always bring some much-needed revenue like you said with Samsung or Tata in India.
Yeah Amazon is another example I mean they do a lot of things too. AWS has changed software and Amazon prime which is a vehement competitor to Netflix and disney+ market share.
The G in AGI suggests that not being specialised is the point.
The real reason is the models just aren't good enough.
Running a single successful fully automated business at scale would be a huge milestone and a legendary PR achievement, but the tech just isn't there yet.
I believe this is the correct answer. You can't run 100 businesses because each one would only receive 1/100 of your attention, and they would all perform poorly.
