@garrytan: "How fast a country adopted new technology over the last 200 years accounts for at least 25% of why some nations are ri…
Summary
A tweet highlights that the speed of technology adoption over 200 years explains 25% of wealth differences, while a reply discusses rising AI populism and threats to the credentialed class.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/25/26, 06:04 AM
“How fast a country adopted new technology over the last 200 years accounts for at least 25% of why some nations are rich and others aren’t today. The Ottomans got the printing press eventually but eventually cost them a lot.”
Julia Willemyns (@jujulemons): I’ve been spending my weekends thinking about AI populism.
Sam Altman’s home was attacked. A councilman found bullet holes in his wall and a note reading ‘No Data Centers.’ Political assassinations are in, which is hardly a good sign.
AI is coming for the credentialed class.
Similar Articles
@timoreilly: A piece I just published reflecting on Jeff Ding's book Technologiy and the Rise of Great Powers. Ding's diffusion theo…
Tim O'Reilly reflects on Jeff Ding's book 'Technology and the Rise of Great Powers,' applying Ding's diffusion theory to AI adoption. He argues that companies focused on frontier AI may be optimizing for the wrong thing, as widespread diffusion of general-purpose technologies across the economy drives long-term success.
Trying to fully wrap my head around how fast ai is moving
A personal reflection questioning the real-world speed of AI impact, arguing that bureaucratic, democratic and physical inertia will delay visible changes despite rapid virtual progress.
@VraserX: AI could create the most productive economy in history and still make ordinary people poorer. Productivity does not aut…
A tweet arguing that AI-driven productivity gains won't automatically benefit ordinary people, and calling for universal capital ownership to ensure prosperity is shared.
@garrytan: Growth is good AI will create unimaginable economic growth and that is the best white pill
A tweet by Garry Tan argues that AI-driven economic growth is a positive development, while quoting Andrew Ho's view that AI is humanity's best hope and not an extinction-level risk.
@natolambert: For a long time, academic researchers being at the cutting edge of new technologies has been a great social equilibrium…
Nathan Lambert discusses the shift of AI research from academia to industry, expressing concern over the loss of neutral scientific communication and the rise of FOMO driving researchers away from open science. He argues that China may become the global hub of AI research if the US continues to unwind institutions.