>If you think the valuations are supported, you need to explain why this new reality is going to be more _profitable_ than the old reality. In my mind it comes

>If you think the valuations are supported, you need to explain why this new reality is going to be more _profitable_ than the old reality. In my mind it comes down to human capital. Until now only a tiny fraction of the global population has had the opportunity to contribute to science and technology in a meaningful way. Before the internet, if you were to have any chance of contributing to science it would require the hiring of expensive tutors, purchasing massive volumes of books, tuition at elite schools, etc. Yes, of course there have always been outliers, but that's not the point. There is a very good reason why the vast majority of scientific breakthroughs made up until now have come from the minority of wealthy elites in the world, and it's not because they are smarter or harder working. It's because they had been given the tools to succeed. And in my opinion the democratization of these tools which has occurred over the last decade will lead to runaway economic growth spurred by technological advances we can't even imagine yet. Essentially a "singularity" argument without the need for A.I.