Stephan Stienstra
Stephan Stienstra
Netherlands
3mo
What If the 'Bubble' Is the Villain the Story Actually Needs? Most commentary on bubbles in tech tends to focus on one question: are we in one, and when will it burst? The tone is often cautious or outright negative, as if the only possible outcome is damage and regret. For me it is a very limiting perspective and a boring one at times. Why? Because we seem to like a straightforward outcome. See it, explain it, demonize it, condemn it and whine about it. 😉 Who doesn’t love it.. Keep in mind though that often we are the main driver of the story through our actions, i.e. buy buy buy. So why not consider a different angle? For once and purely as a conceptual lens, not as a literal claim, stating this to keep the purist at bay. What if periods of extreme narrative-driven enthusiasm sometimes function like a necessary antagonist in the larger story of (technological) progress? Like a movie villain whose extreme actions, however painful, create the conditions for something more sustainable to emerge afterward. In this view, the bubble does not merely inflate prices beyond current fundamentals. It forces a confrontation between ambitious future narratives and present-day realities. It is the mirror we sometimes so desperately try to avoid, showing us realities that we are often aware of but choose to ignore. This confrontation often leads to a phase of maturation, weaker ideas and business models are filtered out, capital and attention are reallocated, concentrated and the infrastructure and capabilities that survive become more robust. The process can be brutal in the short term, but it may also clear space. Both literally and figuratively for the next chapter of development. Of course, this metaphor has clear limits and is more so intended as food for thought. Unlike a deliberate character in a story, market dynamics are emergent and uneven in their consequences. Not every correction produces lasting value, and the pain is rarely distributed fairly or evenly. Still, history shows that after intense periods of enthusiasm and subsequent adjustment, meaningful (technological) infrastructure and dominant positions often remain — sometimes stronger than before. For those thinking about positioning within the current AI ecosystem and what is here now and may come after, this perspective places extra weight on questions of timing, the specific part of the value chain, and the time horizon one is willing to maintain. It also leaves room to consider what might follow the present wave. For instance in areas such as advanced robotics or quantum computing, where similar patterns of enthusiasm and maturation could eventually play out. Progress has rarely moved in a straight line. It has often advanced through cycles of strong conviction, necessary friction, and renewed curiosity. Perhaps the most interesting question is not only whether a bubble exists, but what role it plays in allowing the story to continue. What do you think?
Not investment advice. The author may have financial interests in the mentioned instruments.
null
.