paint-brush
AI: Will You See or Be Made to See?by@Ramu_byiringiro
New Story

AI: Will You See or Be Made to See?

by Ramu BYIRINGIRO4mApril 9th, 2025
Read on Terminal Reader
Read this story w/o Javascript
tldt arrow

Too Long; Didn't Read

The internet was dismissed as a speculative bubble at the turn of the millennium. But from the wreckage of that bubble, the likes of Amazon, Google, and PayPal reshaped the very foundations of commerce, information, and finance. Today, we stand at the precipice of another shift. AI is not the future, it is the past and the present.

Companies Mentioned

Mention Thumbnail
Mention Thumbnail
featured image - AI: Will You See or Be Made to See?
Ramu BYIRINGIRO HackerNoon profile picture

History doesn’t reward hesitation, it rewards adaptation.


By Ramu BYIRINGIRO


In every era, there are those who choose to see and those who are made to see.


At the turn of the millennium, the internet was dismissed as a speculative bubble. And it was. The media called it overhyped. Economists, scholars, and self-proclaimed intellectuals argued it had little to no real value. Companies clung to old models, believing brick-and-mortar businesses would always reign supreme.


And yet, from the wreckage of that bubble, the likes of Amazon, Google, and PayPal reshaped the very foundations of commerce, information, and finance. Those who recognized the internet not as a passing trend but as a fundamental shift in how the world operated became the architects of the 21st century.


Today, we stand at the precipice of another shift. AI is not the future, it is the past and the present. But just like the internet in the late 1990s, it is misunderstood, debated, and dismissed. This is a speculative bubble. But what emerges from its wreckage will redefine how intelligence itself is used.

1995: The Netscape Template

In 1995, Netscape Communications went public with much fanfare. Its IPO was a spectacle, its stock price surged from $28 to over $75 in a single day. At its peak, the company was valued at nearly $3 billion, despite lacking profitability. Even with a revolutionary product in its web browser, it was not cleared for long-term sustainability.


This IPO set the tone for a generation of internet startups: a rush to market driven by speculation rather than solid business fundamentals. The bubble swelled, and as competitors like Microsoft’s Internet Explorer overtook Netscape, the era exposed the fragility of unsustainable investment strategies.


But Netscape’s IPO opened the floodgates. Suddenly, hundreds of companies rushed to market, most with no real product-market fit or viable business model. Many faltered. Yet in their failure, they paved the way for the internet to become ubiquitous.


It wasn’t Netscape’s business model that proved revolutionary. It was the very act of going public. The template was set as one that tech companies would follow for decades. The real winners of the 90s were those who understood the infrastructure behind the hype, the Amazons and Googles that quietly built sustainable long-term visions.

2012: The Neural Awakening

In 2012, a deep neural network designed by Geoffrey Hinton’s team at the University of Toronto, AlexNet, seemed like an unassuming breakthrough. But it laid the foundation for the current AI revolution.


By winning the ImageNet competition, AlexNet proved that GPUs weren’t just for rendering video game graphics. They were engines for deep learning. A new era was signaled—one in which intelligence was no longer a one-way input-output system but a two-way street between machine and human cognition.


The 1990s saw Intel and AMD dominate CPUs—the bedrock of computing. But the AI age belongs to GPUs. No company embodies this shift more than Nvidia, whose market cap soared 800% from 2012 to 2025, as deep learning models transformed GPUs into the engines of intelligence.


Just as fiber optics, server farms, and processors were built long before e-commerce and social media flourished, today, GPUs, large language models, and neural networks are advancing faster than we can comprehend their full implications.

The 1-in-100 Rule of AI

If you had invested in 100 startups during the dot-com era, 99 would have failed. But one would have been Amazon, Google, or PayPal. A trillion-dollar empire in the making.


In 2025, venture capitalists like Y Combinator, Sequoia, SoftBank, and a16z understand this rule. Bet on 100 players. 99 will fail. The one that wins will return 300x.


And with AI, the stakes are even greater.

The Inevitable AGI Era

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is not a distant theory; it is inevitable.


When 99 AI startups fail, the one that succeeds will do for intelligence what Google did for information and what Amazon did for commerce.

Every screen, every device, and every system will have an AI agent, an assistant, a decision-maker, a silent force working in the background. AI will not be an option. It will be as fundamental as the internet itself.


Myths warn of AI ending the world. Open-source AI is framed as an existential threat. But in reality, AGI is the next Excel, Word, and 2000s-era SEO.


Much like the Luddites of the Industrial Revolution, today’s AI skeptics see disruption rather than transformation. But history tells a different story. History does not reward hesitation. It rewards adaptation. Jobs will never be taken by AI, they will be taken by people who use AI.


Just as brick-and-mortar businesses hesitated to adopt the internet and were overtaken by Amazon, companies that hesitate to adopt AI will be outcompete.


AGI will not be a single software. It will be an ecosystem. AI agents will be embedded in every workflow. Decision-making will be at scale.

Just as spreadsheets replaced ledgers, AI agents will replace decision fatigue. AI will not just automate tasks; it will restructure intelligence itself.


The tale goes: "An accountant who used a ledger and calculator to balance a balance sheet lost the job to an Excel user."


Tomorrow’s AI-literate professionals will do the same to those who refuse to adapt.


Today, in this era, are you the one who chooses to see or the one who will be made to see?