Listen to Steve read this post below (8 min audio)
The car was the biggest consumer revolution in history. It not only changed how we work and live, it changed the physical landscape. We might argue that Henry Ford figuratively invented suburbs.
And the cool thing about cars? We own them.
Right from the start you could lift the hood, tinker with the motor, change the carburettor, soup it up, race it, break it, fix it — because it was yours. No “copyright violations,” no “end-user licence agreements.” Just someone who owned something and wanted to exercise their right to do as they pleased with their own asset.
Today, we don’t own anything with software inside it. We only license it.
Imagine if your car was like your iPhone — you can’t open it, can’t change it, and if you try, you’ve broken the law. That’s where we’re heading with robots and AI. Unless we pivot from the current trajectory.
We need the same spirit we had with cars and the early internet: ownership and agency.
If you buy a robot, you should be able to open it up, change it, reprogram it, and send it to work for you. That’s freedom. That’s real capitalism — an economy where people get to interact with the factors of production. Change, adapt and build on them, in any way that they choose. If we can’t, then we’ll be in a protectionist oligarchy — not a free-market economy.
Who will own the robot?
But ownership — that’s going to be the key issue.
So let’s keep it simple… Would you rather rent or own something of great value?
Owning is better. Always has been. Forget the tiny exceptions. If you rent, you’re at the mercy of the owner. When you own, you set the rules.
It’s the same with technology. But we’ve been hoodwinked in the past couple of decades into licensing and subscriptions. Let’s take this blog. I’ve been writing it for 20 years, I own the email list — not Facebook. I get to use it as I please, take it with me to different platforms like I did here — I took it to Substack from Mailchimp. That wouldn’t be the case if it were in Zuckerberg World!
If we don’t own the robots — if we don’t own the code, the models, the software inside them — then we’re just digital tenants, paying rent to Big Tech landlords who’ve automated the world on our behalf.
The Robot That Works for You
Let’s play this out.
If I gave you a robot that could do your job — a perfect digital twin — would that make you better off? Of course it would. You’d send it in to do your work for you, or the bits you didn’t like so you could focus on what gets you excited in your career. Your asset would be generating productivity or even direct revenue for you as ‘the owner’.
Autonomous vehicles are a good example. If we have direct ownership of them, and they have primary autonomous functionality with safety boundaries built in, we could create something with them economically by coding them for specific purposes, geographies, routes and customers. An entirely new entrepreneurial ecosystem would emerge. But the likely outcome today, is that Waymo and Tesla will own and control all of them.
Now let’s consider humanoid robots. What if I sell a robot — not to you, but to your boss? That changes everything. All of a sudden, it’s Robot Kings versus Human Serfs.
The only difference is who owns and can tinker with the technology.
The Policy Issue of Our Age
This isn’t a technology problem. It’s a distribution problem.
We’ve built the tools that could set us free — but unless the legal structures around them evolve, we’ll just recreate feudalism with faster Wi-Fi.
When policymakers talk about GDP, they miss the point. Whether you own the robot or your boss does, GDP still goes up. But the distribution of the economic benefits? That’s the difference between a civilisation of abundance and a society of servitude.
The Pro-Tech Revolution We Actually Need
But, unless you’re a billionaire or own massive chunks of Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, Tesla, NVIDIA, Figure, Boston Dynamics, or Unitree… then this is what your tech strategy needs to include:
Lobbying for laws that let everyone own and modify the technology they buy.
Yep — adopt the tech, but don’t forget that occasionally the rules of the game need a reset when it’s impossible for all players to win.
That’s what real markets are — places of competition where the most creative and courageous can win, not just those with the biggest bank balances.
We need the same revolution we had with TVs, cars, and the early web — where you owned what you bought, and you could use it however you pleased.
Companies should be free to build amazing tech, but people must be free to own the tools that power their work. Employees should be able to bring their robot, their AI assistant, their digital twin into the job with them — just like they bring their laptop, their phone, and their car to work.
The future of work? Humans augmented by the machines they own.
The moment we get that balance right — corporate innovation and individual agency — we’ll ignite a new kind of prosperity. Not one controlled by the Magnificent 7, but one where a new game is started, and anyone can win
Steve.
** Get me into do an AI keynoteat your next event.I’ll use this asmy testimonial!