Let's imagine a scenario.
Existing companies have structures and systems that make it too hard for them to integrate machine intelligence to complement and support their human intelligence. Hyper-adaptive, born-in-AI companies emerge and grow over the next three to five years that can evolve and scale faster and more efficiently because they carry no legacy that limits their change. Existing companies struggle to compete because they have human intelligence put in places that constrain rather than relate, connect, and explore.
Capitalism is relentless and attracts entrepreneurs who are relentless and creative. Given this scenario, identify the three most strategically effective intervention points for slowing AI-native companies. For each intervention point:
-
Provide a historical parallel - Draw from past examples of how established industries either successfully slowed disruptors or failed to do so (such as taxis vs Uber, banks vs fintech, telecommunications deregulation, etc.)
-
Explain stakeholder dynamics - Analyze how different actors (policymakers, incumbent CEOs, workers, consumers, investors) would approach this intervention differently, and what coalitions might form to support or oppose it
-
Distinguish temporal strategies - Separate short-term tactics (1-2 years) from longer-term structural changes, explaining why timing matters for effectiveness
-
Analyze unintended consequences - For each approach, predict what unexpected effects or adaptive workarounds might emerge, and how AI-native companies might evolve in response
-
Assess ethical justification - Evaluate whether each intervention serves broader societal interests or merely protects incumbents, considering when slowing innovation might be justified versus when it becomes harmful protectionism
-
Evaluate implementation realism - Assess the political feasibility of each approach, including what enforcement mechanisms would be required and how likely they are to succeed in practice
Focus on interventions that would be most effective specifically against the unique advantages of AI-native organizational structures, rather than generic anti-competitive measures.