There’s a lot of excited arithmetic going around about artificial intelligence. A trillion-dollar valuation here, a hundred-billion-dollar funding round there, the price of a model quoted like the budget of a moon mission. I’ve been writing this column long enough — since the Reagan administration, if you want to make me feel old about it — to have learned one durable thing about computing: the number everybody is staring at is almost never where the money ends up.
Let me tell you about two companies that figured that out early.
The first is ARM. If you’re reading this on a phone, there’s an ARM design inside it. There’s one in the tablet on your nightstand, the car in your driveway, probably the watch on your wrist. ARM is in nearly every smartphone on the planet. And here’s the part that ought to stop you cold: ARM has never manufactured a single chip. Not one. They don’t own a factory. They design an instruction set — the basic grammar a processor uses to think — and they license it. Everybody else does the expensive, dangerous, capital-soaked work of actually building the silicon. ARM collects a royalty measured in pennies on each chip, and those pennies, multiplied across the entire industry, have made a company that builds nothing worth more than many of the companies that actually run the factories.
The second is Dolby. Ray Dolby could have spent his career building the world’s best noise-reduction box and selling it to recording studios, and he’d have done fine. Instead he did something smarter. He turned his method for cleaner sound into a standard, and then he made that standard the thing every other manufacturer wanted on the box. You never bought a Dolby. You bought a tape deck, or a receiver, or a movie ticket, and somewhere on it was a little double-D logo that meant somebody had paid Ray Dolby for the privilege of sounding good. He didn’t win the audio market. He put a toll booth on it.
I bring up these two old stories because I think we’re about to watch the same trick get played in AI, and almost nobody is positioned for it.
Here’s the uncomfortable truth underneath all that trillion-dollar arithmetic: intelligence is on its way to becoming a commodity. The models are converging. The thing that felt like magic two years ago is now something you can rent by the token from half a dozen vendors, and the price only goes one direction. When you can swap one model for another the way you swap one brand of gasoline for another, you’re no longer looking at a miracle. You’re looking at a utility. And utilities don’t command trillion-dollar margins for long.
So, if intelligence gets cheap, where does the value go? It goes, as it always does, to whatever stays scarce.
And the scarce thing in AI isn’t intelligence. It’s trust.
We’ve built machines that are fluent and confident and, a meaningful fraction of the time, wrong — wrong in the specific, expensive way that sounds exactly as authoritative as being right. I’ve spent a good part of this series on that problem, because it is the problem. A model that is brilliant and occasionally invents things is not something you can put in front of an insurance adjuster, a radiologist, a loan officer, or a judge. The intelligence is already good enough. What’s missing is the guarantee.
Now here’s the interesting thing about a guarantee like that. Once somebody works out how to verify an AI’s answer — to know, before it ever reaches a human, whether the system is standing on solid ground or making it up — that capability doesn’t behave like a product. It behaves like a standard.
Think about why. You don’t want trustworthy AI in one app. You want it everywhere the AI is, the way you want the brakes to work in every car and not just the one in the showroom. A verification layer is only worth something if it sits underneath everything — and the fastest way to get underneath everything is not to build a rival to every AI company on earth. It’s to license the one thing they all need and let them keep competing on everything else.
That’s ARM. That’s Dolby. You don’t sell the trustworthy machine. You license the part that makes the machine trustworthy, and you collect a sliver every time it runs.
It’s an odd business to explain at a cocktail party, because the honest one-line description is “we sell nothing.” We don’t want to build the model. We don’t want to win the application market. We don’t want to run the data center. We want to be the instruction set for verified answers — the double-D logo on the box that tells a regulated buyer the output can be trusted — and to be paid a small, dull, recurring amount every single time, across a base that is growing faster than almost anything in the history of this industry.
Small and dull and recurring, multiplied by enormous, is exactly how ARM quietly became worth more than the giants whose chips it lives inside. You don’t have to win the market. You have to be the toll on it.
I find this clarifying, and not only for business reasons. For a decade the working assumption in AI has been that the prize goes to whoever builds the biggest brain. I think that’s the wrong race, or at least the wrong finish line. The biggest brain is going to get cheaper every year, the way the fastest chip and the cleanest sound did before it. The durable money — the ARM money, the Dolby money — is going to belong to whoever owns the standard that everyone else has to license in order to be believed.
Trust is going to be the most valuable thing in artificial intelligence. And trust, it turns out, is something you license, not something you sell.
Disclosure: I’m a co-founder of 2Brains, Inc., which is built on exactly the idea in this column — so season my enthusiasm with the appropriate grain of salt. I’ve tried to make the argument stand on its own two feet, the way ARM and Dolby do, whether or not you ever pay me a nickel

Small nit: ARM _has_ made chips to test their designs and I’m sure Dolby has built some speaker systems (and in fact entire theaters), so it’s more accurate to say neither have _sold_ any, but there are definitely companies that have blindly used the provided reference designs, free to them since they’re paying royalties.
And you never delivered on any of your promises for paper floppy disks or Mineserver units
hi
I don’t understand the moat for this. Do you have some way of verifying answers that no one else does?
I like the efforts you have put in this, regards for all the great content.
Sito chiaro e privo di distrazioni inutili.
Excellent summary. The HYIP and crypto space is noisy; an independent monitor like Income Radar helps cut through it.
Sure, 99% of ARM and Dolby’s income is as you say.
But I’m sure they had to build a working proof-of-concept
to get their technology accepted.
So to use 2Brains as a trust lookup, you’re gonna have
to prove that it works — meaning you’ll at least need a
working prototype. I’m sure you know this.
Having said that, one would think that looking up
“facts” that come from an AI in order to confirm that
they’re actually true, would be way easier than generating
those “facts” in the first place — especially if you
use “more conventional” search programming for that
purpose (without AI, in other words).
In short, your “2Brains” project sounds like a wonderful
project. I hope it succeeds.
I’m impressed that you wrote the entire article without mentioning the word “patent” once, as though it might dilute your point somehow.
The current iteration of what’s called AI isn’t patent encumbered probably because it’s entirely existing principles of linear algebra, the way weight mapping a 3D model using dual quaternions seems novel but is leveraging 19th century mathematics.
Where this becomes a challenge to AI firms is producing an algorithm that’s novel enough to be patentable; the good old days of patenting the HTML `object
Where this becomes a challenge to AI firms is producing an algorithm that’s novel enough to be patentable; the good old days of patenting the HTML `object` element or the OpenXML standard of separating markup from plaintext are no longer as easily foisted on the USPTO and more to the point, the US still remains an outlier when it comes to software patents.
ARM was founded to ensure a stable, inexpensive low-power ISA ideal for battery-powered devices at a time when the market would otherwise have splintered into competing Intel/Motorola/AMD/Via fiefdoms of incompatible specs and instruction sets, but the key issue here is the customers were chip fab plants already financially able to pass licensing costs on to the end users. Dolby’s standards for audio hardware in the DVD standard are the sole reason the Nintendo Wii didn’t play DVDs; the laser could decode the format but the Wii’s substandard audio hardware wouldn’t be permitted to advertise DVD playback. But it’s software patents where licensing becomes an issue: (uncompressed) TIFF and JPEG became standards by not requiring a fee from software developers or camera manufacturers. Conversely, Frauenhofer and MPEG-LA trying to extract licensing fees while pushing MP3 and MP4 as de facto standards only led to the rise of alternative patent-unencumbered formats even when they were inferior. PNG literally only exists because of the Unisys patent even though it far surpassed GIF.
It’s not much of a prediction to say an eventual iteration of the systems we mislabel as “AI” will be privately developed without public research articles explaining the algorithms, but the current failures in AI are the direct result of avoiding the computationally expensive methods by which our brains and sensory organs comprehend and react to the outside world. The flaws of LLMs and computer vision are not soluble through a supervisory layer or separation of tasks, and nature’s refusal to attempt this ought to be sufficient disproof.
Hydraulic lifting technology continues to evolve rapidly.
Saya suka banget sama gaya penulisan di TerraTweakHub, nggak berbelit-belit dan langsung ke intinya. Kadang baca artikel soal lingkungan di situs lain, 3 paragraf baru masuk ke poin utama. Disini langsung praktik, cocok buat yang mager baca panjang-panjang kayak saya.
How will you know if the filing cabinet is filled with the right documents? What will verify the the verifier?
Excellent write-up. I learned several new things from this post. Have a great day and thanks for sharing.
Fatti trovare da familiari e utenti della tua zona con Necrologi.click.
I just want to know who the NerdTV Season 2 super secret guest was. Please. 😐
The level of clarity and structure in this writing exemplifies high-quality professional communication.
Roger?
Jeremy?
>Roger?
>Jeremy?
Roger has been happily living his life Cringely-free for years now.
As for myself, I decided that it Cringely wasn’t even going to bother to have a human write these articles, I wasn’t going to bother to respond to them.
ARM, which was spun out of Acorn Computers, did do chips. They did the ARM1, which was a co-processor for the BBC Micro. Then they did the “Archimedes” range of computers, the first fully 32-bit RISC WIMP computers. They were fast, they worked fantastically. At a time when 486 machines were still running DOS.
And they did the ARM3 too. Their own chips. No, they didn’t own a Fab, but many companies “make their own” at a fab.
Then Nokia wanted a low powered IC. The thing about ARM is just now low powered they are. That lead to the “Thumb” instruction set and a 16bit external memory interface. They then changed to selling the IP for the chips and licensing out their design.
Now ARM has gone full circle and is back in the desktop / notebook computer with Apple Silicon. A MacBook Air’s processor will use 8 watts of power and the equivalent Intel 45 watts (roughly). That’s the ARM advantage.
As for Dolby, the technology is guff. “Contour Biasing” invented by Archie Pettigrew (RIP) is far better. CD quality on a chrome tape. Full bandwidth, no noise.