Benedict Evans: AI eats the world (Spring 26) [pdf]
74 points
1 hour ago
| 10 comments
| static1.squarespace.com
| HN
btucker
45 minutes ago
[-]
You can find the 4 versions of Benedict's deck here: https://www.ben-evans.com/presentations I appreciate the temporal view into this thinking. My interpretation:

Nov 2024: Don’t dismiss this; it may be the next platform shift. But the actual questions are still unsettled: scaling, usefulness, deployment, and business model.

May 2025: The model layer is already showing signs of commoditization, so the important question shifts toward deployment: products, use cases, UX, errors, and enterprise adoption.

Nov 2025: The capital cycle has become the story: everyone is spending because missing the platform shift is worse than overbuilding, but there is still no clarity on product shape, moats, or value capture. That creates bubble-like dynamics.

May 2026: Provisional thesis: models look likely to become infrastructure, while value probably moves up-stack into apps, workflows, product, proprietary data/context, GTM, and new questions made possible by cheap automation. But he is still explicitly calling this provisional.

reply
flossly
41 minutes ago
[-]
I think that DeepSeek may be important to that. They have a really good model that's open source, raising the bar for all other players: how good your model needs to be so you can make meaningful money on it (better than DeepSeek).

Same thing happened on other places the open source offering became popular.

reply
dist-epoch
27 minutes ago
[-]
What good is an open-weights DeepSeek model if you have nowhere to run it?

OpenAI / Google / Anthropic / XAI also have a ton of compute. That is the real moat.

reply
wolttam
10 minutes ago
[-]
I just got into self hosting Deepseek v4 Flash on a single DGX Spark via antirez’s DwarfStar 4 project

It feels great to finally have access to something local.

reply
nmfisher
12 minutes ago
[-]
antirez running (quantized) DeepSeek V4 Pro on a Mac Studio M3 Ultra with 512GB of RAM:

https://bsky.app/profile/antirez.bsky.social/post/3mlzwmvlov...

It's much closer than you think. We're going to see specialized hardware in the next 24 months capable of running 2025-era frontier models. That's big.

reply
amanaplanacanal
13 minutes ago
[-]
That seems pretty temporary if people can just build more compute.
reply
benedictevans
41 minutes ago
[-]
Well, yes. Anyone who tells you they know how this is going to work is an idiot.
reply
kannanvijayan
7 minutes ago
[-]
This is a reasonably well-examined take of the situation.

On the technical side, one of the additional things I've had on my mind is the potential that these mega models are in fact hiding a ton of inefficiency.

The approach of simply shoving higher dimensionality and more parameters into largely tweaks to the current models has delivered results, but it feels like "mainframe" era of computing to me.

Throwing reams of annotated human content and forcing the machine to globally draw associations from it feels clumsy. Just as people are able to learn structured knowledge via rule-systems that are successively elaborated with extensions and situational contradictions, I feel like there's probably a much more compact representational model that can be reached by adapting the current technical foundations (transformers, attention, etc.) to work well with generated examples from rule-systems, that then gets used as a base layer to augment the "high level" models that process unstructured data.

The risk for the behemoth datacenter might be similar to the risk in the early computing era of building compute centers right before the PC revolution took off.

If it turns out that there exists some more compact and efficient representation for this intelligence (which IMHO is likely given that we are still in the first generation of this technology), the datacenters may end up decaying mausoleums of old tech that has no relevance to a distributed intelligence future.

That's the big technical unknown unknown for me. How much efficiency juice is there left to squeeze, and what does that mean for a distributed landscape vs a centralized datacenter based landscape.

reply
ocimbote
43 seconds ago
[-]
tl;dr;

> "What happened the last time that everything changed?"

Honestly, I'm glad we hear more of the commoditization of AI, and I hope that the comparison of AI with water or electricity will become mainstream and that the states (as in nation states) will understand that sooner rather than later and act accordingly.

reply
throwaw12
59 minutes ago
[-]
> What happened the last time that everything changed?

* Hardware era (pre 1995s) -> IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Apple

* Internet era (1994-2001) -> Amazon, Google, Meta, Salesforce

* Mobile era (iPhone+ era) -> Uber, Mobile Games, Youtube, Snapchat, Tiktok, Airbnb

* Cloud era (AWS+ era) -> AWS, GCP, Azure, Snowflake, Databricks and bunch of other data & database startups

AI era (ChatGPT+ era) -> Change is inevitable

reply
hennell
15 minutes ago
[-]
? That appears to be arbitrary eras then arbitrary companies from that era. Do you think Amazon and Google disappeared after 2001? Do you think databricks is now bigger than IBM?

Change might be inevitable, but I'm not sure your list shows or proves that.

reply
MyHonestOpinon
35 minutes ago
[-]
Nice breakdown! I would separate the Hardware era between Mainframe era and PC era. I would extend Internet era a bit more, Perhaps 2007 when the IPhone was released.

Edit: I hadn't seen the original presentation yet. I see that Evans already divided the eras like I suggest above.

reply
brainless
39 minutes ago
[-]
If coding is such a big part of LLM agents' usage at the moment, I do not understand how far the best models will continue to shine and take the largest chunk of revenue. I am far away from tech hubs but I think better harness will utilize smaller models for more constrained, efficient and reliable coding agents.

In a way this is like distilling (but it is not) but you can make better harness (tackle more edge cases, better tool/function definitions, sandbox handling, bash management, DB management, deployment management, etc.) but extracting what LLMs know into code.

Maybe I am wrong but I would like to see custom software for the last mile (tiny/small businesses) becoming a reality. AI would eat the world of software but costs would go down since you can extract value upstream from the LLMs and spread downstream through tighter coding agents.

I am building a coding agent that will not be small - it will be a lot of code, carefully mixed roles (mimic a software dev shop) with separate tools available to different roles. And all this code is generated by other coding agents. https://github.com/brainless/nocodo

I am a nobody from nowhere with 18 years of software engineering behind me. I do not care about revenue. I just want to see a regular business owner's workflow going live on their own VPS.

reply
dwa3592
35 minutes ago
[-]
>>Companies report ‘annualised’ revenue, defined as sum of previous 4 weeks multiplied by 13.

why is it multiplied by 13?

reply
tedd4u
5 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah it's weird huh? The "average" month contains 4.35 weeks.

(365/7)/12 = 4.3452…

reply
neogodless
31 minutes ago
[-]
52 weeks / 4 weeks = 13
reply
Calc13
31 minutes ago
[-]
13*4=52 weeks, mostly
reply
jaccola
32 minutes ago
[-]
52/4 = 13
reply
briodf
31 minutes ago
[-]
28*13=364
reply
aworks
22 minutes ago
[-]
"Chat is a terrible UX General use needs ‘apps’"

I'm old so my computer career has gone: punch cards => calculators => command-line => GUI => touch screen => voice => chat. Chat seems to be the best blend of expressiveness and utility, with a dose of magic thrown in.

reply
gallerdude
28 minutes ago
[-]
I was a baby when the Internet Revolution happened. I was in high school and college when the Mobile Revolution steamrolled everything. It’s been interesting to see this one, as an adult working in the world. I wonder how far it will go.
reply
stego-tech
18 minutes ago
[-]
Further than the doomers think, but not enough to pay off the investors of the original boom. I say that as someone who has been an early believer in the internet (first website in the 90s), mobile data (slurping down the 'net, IRC, and IMs via EDGE data), smartphones (N80ie), streaming media (RIP Windows MCE), the list goes on.

Models were always going to be the commodity, just like the most popular and viable use cases at present are less job-replacement than "let's analyze huge data sets for patterns we're missing, and adjust accordingly" or "probabilistically generate deterministic software for me for X function/task". One-offs simply aren't profitable when models are interchangeable commodities, hence that brief attempt to pivot to "pay by outcome" before giddily embracing the classic consumption-based-billing playbook.

reply
2817635
48 minutes ago
[-]
Didn't Ben Evans previously shill for bitcoin, which is now omitted in the graphs for "disruptive technologies"?

This is a marketing Gish Gallop talk that pretends to invalidate counterarguments with a couple of fantasy graphs.

reply
benedictevans
42 minutes ago
[-]
You should repost this using your name.

And then, if there is any data that you think is incorrect, or arguments that you disagree with, you should explain why. All of the charts are sourced, and none of them are 'fantasies'.

reply
hansmayer
16 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah, beyond this mumbo-jumbo non-answer of yours, did you or did you not push crypto? Because if you did...it could kind of not speak for your analytical competence.
reply
lorecore
2 minutes ago
[-]
It is an indisputable fact that you spent years shilling crypto. Why even deny that or threaten(!) someone pointing it out? It was/is a huge, verifiable chunk of your public output.
reply
dwa3592
22 minutes ago
[-]
not to be too pedantic but sourced doesn't usually mean accurate. sourced can very well be fantasy. it will be a 'sourced fantasy' in that case or hallucination if you used a LLM.
reply
tokai
10 minutes ago
[-]
Hah wow, what a way to confirm what he posted.
reply
tovej
37 minutes ago
[-]
Why do you need this persons name?
reply
adamtaylor_13
28 minutes ago
[-]
The implication is that it's a bot saying this, not a person.
reply
asrqwj
19 minutes ago
[-]
No it isn't. The implication is that pro-AI people can take revenge. He knows he is secure with his opinions. He even paraphrases Andreesen's title "software will eat the world". He has repeatedly appeared at a16z.

It is very secure to be pro-AI while the rest has to resort to unregistered typewriters like in the Soviet Union.

reply
tovej
24 minutes ago
[-]
Doesn't seem like a bot, and even if it were, the critique is germane. Calling for a name is a little threatening.
reply
dist-epoch
34 minutes ago
[-]
It will literally eat the world. Just like we crowded out wild animals in a few reserved areas, so will AI data centers crowd us out.

To quite Ilya Sutskever:

> I think it’s pretty likely the entire surface of the earth will be covered with solar panels and data centers.

reply