Author claims they will not use AI for any purpose

The author declares a blanket refusal to use AI, positioning the stance as a reaction against a perceived hype-driven market. The piece frames AI as a tool designed to create dependency, citing heavy subsidies from billionaires and large corporations. It characterises the current environment as a “gravy train” part of a “rug pull scam.” The claim is presented without naming a specific organization, using “we” to refer to the author’s group.

According to the article, the subsidies that keep AI services cheap are finite, and investors will eventually demand returns. When that funding dries up, the “true cost of running AI models” will surface, according to the author. The text predicts that users who have become dependent will be forced to pay “big” fees. This scenario is described as a driver for further wealth accumulation among “AI Robber Barons.”

For engineers, the warning highlights two practical concerns: operating expense and vendor lock-in. If AI services become expensive, projects built on them may need to allocate significant budget for inference and maintenance. The author’s stance suggests that avoiding AI altogether can sidestep these future cost spikes and preserve long-term independence.

The article concludes by emphasizing a value of “independence and long-term planning,” rejecting the “false premise of the ‘AI Future.’” This rhetorical position serves as a cautionary note rather than a technical roadmap. Engineers evaluating AI adoption should weigh the short-term productivity boost against the potential for later financial and strategic constraints described in the piece.