The article suggests that AI-related productivity gains could follow a J-curve. An initial decline, as initially happened with IT, followed by an exponential surge. They admit this is heavily dependent on the real value AI provides.

However, there's another factor. The J-curve for IT happened in a different era. No matter when you jumped on the bandwagon, things just kept getting faster, easier, and cheaper. Moore's law was relentless. The exponential growth phase of the J-curve for AI, if there is one, is going to be heavily damped by the enshitification phase of the winning AI companies. They are currently incurring massive debt in order to gain an edge on their competition. Whatever companies are left standing in a couple of years are going to have to raise the funds to service and pay back that debt. The investment required to compete in AI is so massive that cheaper competition may not arise, and a small number of (or single) winner could put anyone dependent on AI into a financial bind. Will growth really be exponential if this happens and the benefits aren't clearly worth it?

The best possible outcome may be for the bubble to pop, the current batch of AI companies to go bankrupt, and for AI capability to be built back better and cheaper as computation becomes cheaper.