As the circular funding economy of AI becomes more transparent, innovation slows and costs increase, it may help us all to temper our AI enthusiasm. There are many indications that the current state of generative AI is neither essential nor as transformative as the frontier AI companies will have us believe. If anything we could make the case that generative AI is a net negative for most stakeholders.

Modern workplaces increasingly reward visibility (“restaurateur” roles) over deep work (“chef” roles), especially during turbulent times. If AI-driven disruption and organisational thrashing favour those who are present and highly visible, what should deep workers do?

The larger the company, the harder it is for them to express dissent, especially under authoritarian regimes. If employees expect their C-suite to be their protest comrades, they’re likely to be disappointed. Our employers cannot be vehicles for our activism.

I’m “AI bipolar” - an enthusiast and a sceptic. Here are some of the reasons I blow hot and cold with AI.

Enterprise AI pilots have a 95% rate of failure. Could it be that people have experiment fatigue and that companies are taking a piecemeal approach to AI innovation?