Generative AI Will Reinvent Every Customer Experience, Says Andy Jassy, Amazon CEO

It always is reasonable to ask “why do we care” about any hyped new technology, and artificial intelligence is no exception. One answer from Andy Jassy, Amazon CEO, is that “generative AI is going to reinvent virtually every customer experience we know, and enable altogether new ones about which we’ve only fantasized.”

For the moment, though, “early AI workloads being deployed focus on productivity and cost avoidance (customer service, business process orchestration, workflow, translation, etc.),” Jassy notes. “Increasingly, you’ll see AI change the norms in coding, search, shopping, personal assistants, primary care, cancer and drug research, biology, robotics, space, financial services, neighborhood networks.” 

Reinvention arguably has been a key impact of every general-purpose technology since the time of the domestication of fire. 

General-Purpose Technology	Impact on Human Life (Well-being, Health, Daily Living)	Impact on Economics (Productivity, Markets, Growth)	Impact on Work (Nature of Jobs, Skills)	Impact on Social Life (Community, Communication, Structure)
Control of Fire	Cooking (safer food, better nutrition), warmth (survival in cold climates), light (extended activity), protection (predators), tool hardening. Improved health & lifespan.	Enabled processing of new materials (food, clay, later metals). Basis for energy use beyond muscle power. Early resource management (fuel gathering).	Required skills in fire starting/maintenance, fuel gathering, cooking. Enabled early specialized tasks like toolmaking.	Hearth became a central gathering point. Fostered group cohesion, storytelling, shared defense. Extended social interaction time.
Agriculture & Domestication	Sedentary lifestyle, more reliable (though potentially less diverse) food supply, population growth, vulnerability to crop failure/disease outbreaks.	Food surpluses enabled trade, specialization of labor beyond food production, concept of property/wealth accumulation, rise of villages/towns.	Farming and animal husbandry became primary occupations. New crafts emerged (pottery, weaving, building).	Led to larger, permanent settlements. Development of social hierarchies, governance, organized religion, property disputes. Reduced nomadism.
The Wheel	Easier transport of heavy goods (less physical strain), facilitated travel (eventually). Enabled pottery production.	Revolutionized land transport for trade & resources, military applications (chariots), increased efficiency in construction and pottery.	Created roles like cart drivers, potters, specialized builders. Facilitated movement of labor/armies.	Increased interaction/trade between settlements. Enabled larger-scale projects and state administration/control.
Writing	Allowed recording & transmission of knowledge, history, laws across time/space. Facilitated complex planning and abstract thought. Foundation for formal education.	Essential for record-keeping (taxes, trade, inventory, ownership), contracts, administration of larger economic units (states, empires). Spread of technical/commercial knowledge.	Created specialized roles: scribes, administrators, scholars, librarians, teachers. Required literacy skills for certain professions.	Enabled codified laws, historical records, literature, religious texts. Facilitated long-distance communication and administration of large polities. Standardization.
Printing Press (Movable Type)	Mass dissemination of information/ideas, increased literacy rates, accelerated scientific revolution, challenged established authorities (e.g., Reformation).	Dramatically lowered cost of producing/distributing information. Spurred publishing industry, standardized texts, faster spread of technical/commercial innovations.	Created printers, typesetters, booksellers, authors, translators. Reduced demand for scribes. Increased importance of literacy in many fields.	Fueled public discourse/opinion, spread of education, standardization of languages, growth of universities, religious/political movements.
Steam Engine	Powered factories independent of water sources, enabled faster travel (trains, ships). Also led to urban pollution, crowded living conditions.	Catalyst for Industrial Revolution. Enabled mass production, factory system, expansion of mining, growth of railways/shipping, concentration of capital.	Shift from agrarian/artisanal work to factory labor. Created engineers, mechanics, factory workers, miners, railway workers. Introduced clock-based work discipline.	Rapid urbanization, emergence of new social classes (industrial working class, bourgeoisie), changes in family structures, rise of labor movements.
Electricity	Electric lighting extended day, powered home appliances (labor saving), refrigeration (food safety), enabled new medical tech (X-rays), powered communications.	Enabled factories anywhere, powered new industries (chemicals, aluminum), increased productivity, allowed 24/7 operations, basis for communications networks.	Created electricians, power plant operators, electrical engineers. Transformed manufacturing processes, enabled office automation (later).	Changed daily routines (evening leisure), new entertainment (cinema, radio), faster communication (telegraph, telephone), altered urban landscapes (streetlights).
Internal Combustion Engine (ICE)	Personal transportation (cars), faster goods transport (trucks), air travel. Increased mobility, suburban sprawl. Also pollution, accidents, noise.	Created automotive, oil/gas, aerospace industries. Spurred road construction, suburban development, global logistics networks, tourism.	Created auto workers, mechanics, truck/taxi drivers, pilots, road crews, gas station attendants. Displaced horse-related industries.	Fostered "car culture," suburban lifestyles, increased individual autonomy/travel, changed urban planning, environmental concerns.
Semiconductor / Computer	Automation of complex calculations, information storage/retrieval, digital entertainment, advanced medical imaging/diagnostics, early digital communication.	Huge productivity gains via automation & data processing. New industries (hardware, software, IT services). Facilitated globalization, financial market automation.	Created programmers, IT support, hardware engineers, data entry/processing roles. Automated many routine clerical/manufacturing tasks. Increased need for digital literacy.	Early online communities, shift in communication (email), vast information access for researchers/hobbyists, foundation for digital age.
The Internet	Instant global communication, vast information access, e-commerce convenience, social networking, online learning/entertainment, telemedicine. Issues of addiction, privacy, misinformation.	Enabled e-commerce, digital marketing, cloud computing, gig economy, data-driven business models, further globalization. Disrupted traditional media, retail, etc.	Explosion of remote work, new roles (web developers, digital marketers, data scientists, content creators). Increased demand for digital skills across all sectors. Gig work platforms emerged.	Transformed social interaction (social media), global communities, access to diverse perspectives, challenges of echo chambers, cyberbullying, digital divide.
Artificial Intelligence	Potential: Enhanced diagnostics/healthcare, personalized education, creative assistance, automation of chores. Concerns: Bias, job displacement, privacy, ethical control, autonomous weapons.	Potential: Massive productivity boosts, hyper-personalization, new business models, autonomous systems (transport, logistics), drug discovery. Concerns: Market disruption, inequality, data security.	Potential: Automation of cognitive & physical tasks, creation of new roles (AI training, ethics, maintenance). Requires: Adaptability, creativity, critical thinking, emotional intelligence. Concerns: Widespread job displacement.	Potential: New forms of interaction (AI companions), enhanced creativity tools, complex problem solving (climate, disease). Concerns: Impact on human relationships, bias amplification, misinformation generation, governance challenges.

Good Outcomes Beat Good Intentions: How Dumb Are We?

Good intentions clearly are not enough when designing policies to improve home broadband availability in underserved areas. In fact, since 2021, more than three years after its passage, the U.S. Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program has yet to install a single new connection.  

It seems we were determined to make the perfect the enemy of the good, preventing construction until we mostly were certain our maps were accurate. A rival approach would have proceeded on the assumption that residents and service providers pretty much know where they have facilities and where they do not; where an upgrade can be conducted fast and easily, and where it cannot. 

And perhaps (despite the clear industry participant interests that always seem to influence our decisions) we should not have insisted on the “fastest speed” platforms. Maybe we’d have prioritized “good enough” connections that could be supplied really fast and enabled the outcomes we were looking for (getting the unconnected connected; getting the underserved facilities that do not impede their use of internet apps). 

This is not, to use the phrase, “rocket science.” We have known for many decades that “good enough” home broadband can be supplied fast, and affordably, if we use satellite (geostationary or low earth orbit, but particularly now LEO) or wireless to enable the connections. 

To those who say we need to supply fiber to the home, some of us might argue the evidence suggests relatively-lower speed (such as 100 Mbps downstream) connections supply all the measurable upside we seek, for homework, shopping, telework. The touted gigabit-per-second or multi-gigabit-per-second connections are fine, but there is very little evidence consumers can even use that much bandwidth. 

Study/Source	Key Findings
Distinguishing Bandwidth and Latency in Households' Willingness to Pay for Broadband Internet Speed (2017)	Consumers value increasing bandwidth from 10 to 25 Mbps at about $24 per month, but the additional value of increasing from 100 Mbps to 1 Gbps is only $19. This suggests diminishing returns for speeds beyond 100 Mbps.
Are you overpaying for internet speeds you don't need? (2025)	Research indicates that many Australians are overspending on high-speed internet connections they don't need. Most households can manage well with a 50 Mbps plan unless they engage in high-bandwidth tasks like 4K streaming or online gaming.
Simple broadband mistake costing 9.5 million households up to £113 extra a year (2024)	Millions of UK households are overpaying for broadband by purchasing higher speeds than necessary. Smaller households often need speeds up to 15 Mbps but pay for over 150 Mbps, wasting £113 annually.
ITIF (2023)	- US broadband speeds outpace everyday demands - Only 9.1% of households choose to adopt 250/25 Mbps speeds when available - Clear inflection point past 100 Mbps where consumers no longer see value in higher speeds
ITIF (2020)	- Average existing connections comfortably handle more than typical applications require - A household with 5 people streaming 4K video simultaneously only needs 2/3 of current average tested speed - Research shows reaching a critical threshold of basic broadband penetration is more important for economic growth than faster speeds
European Research (2020)	- Full fiber networks are not worth the costs - Partial, not full end-to-end fiber-based broadband coverage entails the largest net benefits
US Broadband Data Analysis	- Compared to normal-speed broadband, faster broadband did not generate greater positive effects on employment
OpenVault Q3 2024 Report	- Average US household uses 564 Mbps downstream and 31 Mbps upstream - Speeds around 500 Mbps sufficient for most families
FCC Guidelines	- 100-500 Mbps is enough for 1-2 people to run videoconferencing, streaming, and online gaming simultaneously - 500-1000 Mbps suitable for 3 or more people with high bandwidth needs

We might all agree that, where it is feasible, fiber to home makes the most long-term sense. But we might also agree that where we want useful home broadband speeds, right now, everywhere, with performance that enables remote work, homework, online shopping and all other internet apps, then any platform delivering 100 Mbps (more for multi-user households, but likely not more than 500 Mbps even in the most-challenging use cases) will do the job, right now. 

Good intentions really are not enough. Good outcomes are what we seek. And that often means designing programs that we can implement fast, at lower cost, with wider impact, immediately or nearly so. “Better” platforms that cost more and are not built are hardly better.

It Appears U.S. Residents are Spending Less Time Out of Home Since 2003

Perhaps “return to office” policies will make a big impact, but there is some evidence U.S. residents are spending less time out of home, with some studies suggesting people are spending about an hour a day less outside the home. 

Some of us tend to think it is a lingering after effect of the Covid pandemic. But it seems that trend started long before the Covid pandemic. 

In fact, “time out of home” has been falling since at least 2003. Most of us would suspect that the internet and internet-enabled product substitutes are contributing directly, allowing us to accomplish some life pursuits or tasks online, without having to leave our homes. 

source: Taylor and Francis 

Shopping on Amazon eliminates a trip to a retail outlet. And we use food and retail delivery services as well. Videoconferencing might eliminate an office visit. 

And while not every job is conducive to “work from home,” lots of us have spent a good portion of our work lives in remote offices and were home-based, because our work allowed it, outcomes were easily quantifiable, internet apps enabled it and industry culture supported it.  

The social impacts might be just as important, such as loneliness that now seems to know no generational bounds. 

To some extent, the data could also reflect, to some degree, any age cohort effects that have higher representation or lower representation of age cohorts within the entire population, since people tend to spend the most time “out of home” between the ages of 13 and 49. 

Age Cohort	Typical Time Out of Home	Common Activities Outside Home	Factors Affecting Time Out
0-5 years	Low	Daycare, playground, family outings	Parental supervision, daycare enrollment
6-12 years	Moderate	School, sports, after-school activities	School hours, parental rules
13-18 years	High	School, extracurriculars, socializing	Independence, school commitments
19-29 years	Very High	College, work, social life, travel	Education, career, social freedom
30-49 years	High	Work, errands, parenting responsibilities	Career, family obligations
50-64 years	Moderate	Work, leisure, travel, hobbies	Nearing retirement, fewer obligations
65+ years	Low to Moderate	Leisure, healthcare visits, social events	Health, retirement, personal interests