Every tech revolution triggers the same panic.

Railroads? Monopoly doom. Electricity? Corporate stranglehold. Internet? Platform death trap.

Some fears came true. Most missed the plot.

AI is now hitting its concentration phase. OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Anthropic—hundreds of billions flowing into models, chips, data centres, talent. At the foundation level, the game is viciously capital-intensive. Most startups? Already priced out.

So the question lands hard: Is the future just five AI tools—and a graveyard?

History says: not quite

Zoom out—something Ray Dalio won’t shut up about for good reason.

Every major innovation wave follows the same arc: power centralizes, then explodes outward.

The fatal mistake: confusing owning the pipes with owning everything that flows through them.

Big Tech is crushing the infrastructure war. That doesn’t hand them the application war.

What’s actually going down

AI funding and compute are concentrating hard at the stack’s base: models, chips, data, centers. Enterprise LLM spending already hits billions, funneling to maybe five players.

Looks apocalyptic for everyone else.

It’s not.

This is cloud computing circa 2008: brutal consolidation below, wild experimentation above.

Where smaller AI tools still win, and keep winning

Real tech value never came from raw infrastructure. It comes from context.

Smaller AI companies dominate when they:

Foundation models don’t understand your hospital’s protocols, your law firm’s risk paranoia, your weird creative workflow. That knowledge lives in applications, not base models.

Hence the explosion of copilots, vertical tools, AI-native products—even as model providers shrink to a handful.

Regulation: annoying, but prevents total domination

Policy matters more than founders want to admit.

EU’s AI Act? Compliance hell that slows everything—but also blocks abusive lock-in. US regulation? Looser, favoring scale, but keeps scrappy startups alive through sheer chaos.

Competition watchdogs are already circling API access, app stores, data policies. Translation: governments expect concentration and are trying (badly) to stop it from becoming total.

Dalio principle: imbalances correct. When power concentrates too much, counter-forces emerge. Always.

The uncomfortable truth about what’s coming

The future isn’t “millions of equal AI companies.” It also isn’t “five tools, game over.”

The actual endpoint:

This is uncomfortable because it’s fragile. Pricing shifts, policy changes, model updates can nuke entire categories overnight. Many startups die fast. Some scale explosively. Few become durable.

That volatility isn’t a flaw—it’s late-cycle innovation working as designed.

What this means if you’re building or using AI

Users: AI won’t feel monopolized. You’ll use a few big-tech copilots—and dozens of niche tools baked into your daily life.

Builders: The lesson is brutal but clear. Trying to beat Big Tech at training massive models? Wrong game, wrong decade. Using those models to solve real, painful, specific problems better than anyone? That’s where the money lives.

The edge

Big Tech isn’t killing smaller AI companies.

It’s killing the fantasy that everyone can compete at the same layer.

The stack’s hardening at the bottom, cracking wide open at the top. That’s not innovation’s end—it’s the start of a nastier, more Darwinian phase.

And if history—and Dalio’s cycles—teach anything:

The moment power looks most locked down is usually when new forms of value start forming quietly at the edges, ready to crack everything open again.

Leave a Reply

Register

Stay informed about the latest developments and how-to guides in the world of artificial intelligence. An account also allows you to leave your rating and review, contributing to the community’s knowledge and experience

Welcome to Wauw AI