I've been thinking about this as well, and I'm glad the author is talking about it. However, I don't think he took it far enough.

It is correct to say there's near-infinite demand for AI, and supply is limited. It stands to reason that wealthier people will pay more, and therefore get more, out of AI.

However, this has always been true, but historically instead of AI it's been workers. The economics of labor haven't changed. So it will, as always, be a game of how you deploy the workers you hire. Are you generating useless morning briefs or are you actually generating value for yourself and others with the AI you buy? If you generate more value that the tokens you burn, you'll get ahead.

This will be true in academia as well, the area of interest to the author. He writes like, before AI, grad student level intelligence came for free.

Ok, wait, sorry, bad example...