Two opposing views below,
**Law of large numbers argument:**
“Google is already enormous, so it becomes harder to grow rapidly.”
**Pareto/power-law argument:**
“If AI dramatically expands the economic pie, the strongest platforms can become disproportionately larger because advantages compound. In accordance with the Pareto principle, major technological shifts can produce highly unequal outcomes, with a small number of leading companies capturing a disproportionate share of the value created.”
So Google being huge today does not automatically prevent it from becoming several times larger. What matters is whether the markets Google serves become much bigger and whether Google captures a large percentage of that expansion.
Imagine AI creates $20–30 trillion of additional economic value over the next decade. That value probably won't be divided evenly among thousands of companies. A handful of platforms might capture a huge share. And there's another part of Pareto that matters: being big can actually make you more likely to get bigger in technological platform shifts.
Let me know whether you believe in the law of large numbers argument or the Pareto law argument regarding the ongoing AI technological change. Please predict which companies will be the winners under the Pareto argument.