> However genAI is too generic and too blunt a tool, as in it does everything. How does this preclude the AI "age"? And why is the metric "companies make money

> However genAI is too generic and too blunt a tool, as in it does everything. How does this preclude the AI "age"? And why is the metric "companies make money off of it"? I view it more like open source/Linux. When Linux was new, it was immensely useful , but not a means for companies to make money (except for a tiny few). Or more precisely, far more people used Linux for their own personal benefit than companies making money off of it. And so it is with generative AI. For me, personally, it's very useful.[1] So assuming the major companies (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc) don't go bankrupt and/or kill it off, gen AI is here to stay, and will continue to disrupt. That startups can't make much money off of it is somewhat irrelevant. [1] It has revolutionized speech recognition for me. I have several automations running that were coded by Claude. Things that had been in my mind for years but I didn't have time to write them. MCP will add more value to my life soon. Etc.