I just read an interesting perspective from Imran Khan, a tech investor who used to be the Chief Strategy Officer at Snap. He has a quite contrasting view on the relationship between AI and crypto, and honestly, his analysis is worth considering.

So Khan manages Proem Asset Management with about $450 million in assets, and he basically says that crypto and AI operate under fundamentally different theses. That doesn't mean he's anti-crypto, but he sees them as separate investment themes. When he invests in AI, his focus is on productivity and economic growth. Crypto? That's a completely different entity.

It's interesting because many argue that crypto and AI will converge, especially with blockchain providing payment rails for AI agents. There’s also an argument that blockchain-based systems can help track how AI models use data or verify outputs. But Khan basically says nope, they operate within completely different frameworks.

That said, Proem still holds positions in Coinbase, Robinhood, and some Bitcoin miners. But Khan emphasizes that these positions are not part of their AI strategy, but part of a broader focus on the tech sector.

What’s interesting is the timing of this perspective. The AI market is cooling down after the ChatGPT boom. Nvidia and Broadcom have fallen about 5 percent since the start of the year, and serious questions are emerging about ROI from massive spending on AI infrastructure.

Here, Khan brings up a hypothetical but worth thinking about scenario. There’s a Citrini report outlining a hypothetical scenario in 2028 where rapid AI adoption causes widespread job losses and a sharp decline in consumer spending. These fears are hypothetical indeed, but Khan has a cool perspective on this.

He argues that similar fears have appeared in almost every technological revolution. Karl Marx said the same about machines 200 years ago. Now, with AI potentially being as big as the Industrial Revolution, people are making the same arguments about job displacement.

According to Khan, new technologies historically reshape labor markets rather than eliminate jobs entirely. When new technology arrives, you create new kinds of jobs. So the hypothetical scenario of an AI apocalypse might be less accurate than the historical pattern.

There’s also another interesting hypothetical angle from NYDIG. They argue that if AI reduces jobs and wages, weakening consumer demand, it could force policymakers to lower interest rates to stabilize the economy. That additional liquidity wave could support Bitcoin prices. So hypothetically, AI disruption could actually be positive for Bitcoin in the long run.

Bottom line: Khan’s take is that you shouldn’t force crypto into an AI portfolio just because of the trending narrative. Both are interesting, but they solve different problems and operate under different theses. Worth considering if you’re evaluating strategies in both sectors.