Lede

Everyone is arguing about whether AI is a bubble while quietly buying tickets to the same casino.

Hermit Off Script

I am ranting about the AI debate where the loudest “expert” doomers often did not build the technology, yet they stand on the sidelines warning about an “AI bubble” like they are the fire brigade and the arsonist at the same time. And the funniest con wrapped around it is this proud little badge people wear: “I use AI daily” or “I do advanced prompt engineering.” Most of that is theatre. If chat AI is trained on language, it is an LLM, and the “advanced” part is usually just being good at saying what you want. If you can explain clearly, you look like a wizard. If you cannot talk properly and you blubber, you call the model stupid because it cannot translate your fog into meaning. Then there is the part nobody wants to say out loud: the models on the market are not the best ones. They are the ones cheap enough to run, safe enough to ship, and useful enough to sell. For many tasks they feel like a faster alternative to classic search because they sift through the SEO landfill and give you a single answer without making you read twenty pages of nonsense. But they hallucinate sometimes, and the danger is that they can look real in the same way a cloned phishing site looks real. Classic search is full of rubbish too, but you usually spot it while scrolling. I actually listen more to the AI doom crowd than the gimmick crowd, not because they are saints, but because I know human nature leans toward destruction and control. Still, anyone who thinks AI will just disappear is not being “realistic”, they are being un-visionary. They are trying to make the future look like the ugly present so they can tolerate their own thoughts. Meanwhile everyone is gambling: shares, savings, billions burned for the promise of trillions, and the same rich circle panicking that the music might stop overnight. Pensions get pushed back, billionaires and soon trillionaires are treated as normal, churches sit filthy rich while pretending their purpose is not social duty, and elections become image contests where money buys access to our choices. So yes, the powerful want AI to succeed, because they do not need people to make money if they can build obedient technological “people” and then throw the rest of us a daily bone. And then we finally get to solutions: a viable one could be a future AI system designed to be impartial and controlled by no one. That is the next revolution, not humans versus machines, but humans who want to own AI versus humans who want AI independent enough to keep freedom and democracy intact. The doomers who boil it down to money and shout ‘bubble’ can do more harm than the extinction crowd, because they push panic and pullbacks that choke investment, delay safeguards, and leave the tech to whoever already has the power.

PS: If you want to “leverage impartial AI” without turning it into a billionaire’s remote control, you do not start with slogans, you start with leverage. Who owns the compute, who sets the training rules, who audits the outputs, who can pull the plug, and who gets sued when it goes wrong? An “independent” AI only exists if its power is split: public-interest governance, hard external audits, transparent model cards and logs, real red-team testing, and more than one provider so nobody gets to hold democracy hostage with a single extension lead. If the referee’s whistle is plugged into a private socket, it is not impartial, it is rented.

What does not make sense

• The bubble doomers: calling it “nothing” while watching major firms pour historic sums into infrastructure, as if capitalism does charity for laughs.
• The hype brigade: promising “transformation” while treating worker retraining like a decorative plant in the lobby.
• The “prompt engineering is a lie” crowd: pretending communication skill is not a skill, then charging money to teach it anyway.
• The “LLMs are just autocomplete” crowd: ignoring that autocomplete at scale becomes a management layer, not a keyboard feature.
• The “AI replaces Google” crowd: acting like hallucinations are a minor glitch, when trust is the whole product.
• The “classic search is all rubbish” crowd: forgetting that chat tools are built on the same web soup, just strained through a smoother voice.
• The “impartial AI referee” fantasy: demanding a neutral umpire while refusing to agree who owns the stadium.
• The democracy line: insisting elections are about “the best person” in a system where attention is bought, rented, and targeted.

Sense check / The numbers

1. The IMF estimates that almost 40 per cent of global employment is exposed to AI, and about 60 per cent in advanced economies. [IMF]
2. Reuters reported that Microsoft, Amazon, Meta and Alphabet were expected to spend roughly US$350bn combined in 2025, driven by AI buildout pressures. [Reuters]
3. A UK government call for evidence restates the legislated timetable: State Pension age rising from 66 to 67 between 2026 and 2028, and from 67 to 68 between 2044 and 2046. [UK Gov]
4. Forbes reported a record 3,028 billionaires worth US$16.1 trillion on its 2025 list snapshot. [Forbes]
5. The Church Commissioners for England said their endowment fund was valued at about GBP 11.1bn at the end of 2024, after a 10.3 per cent return in 2024. [Church of England]
6. OpenSecrets projected the 2024 US federal election cycle would cost at least US$15.9bn, exceeding the 2020 nominal record of US$15.1bn. [OpenSecrets via The Fulcrum]

The sketch

Scene 1: The Prompt Cathedral
Panel: A robed “Prompt Guru” sells scrolls labelled “ADVANCED PROMPTS” to office workers holding empty mugs.
Guru: “For only GBP 199, you too can ask a question… but with confidence.”
Worker: “So the secret is… speaking clearly?”
Guru: “Blasphemy. Add three adjectives and a KPI.”
Scene 2: Bubble Bingo
Panel: A boardroom. Executives watch a screen: “CAPEX: US$350bn”. One holds a cushion marked “SHARE PRICE”.
Exec 1: “We are investing in the future.”
Exec 2: “We are investing in not being left behind.”
Exec 3: “Same thing. Different PowerPoint.”
Scene 3: The Impartial Referee
Panel: A shining AI robot wearing a referee whistle. A billionaire holds the power cable like a leash.
Citizen: “Is it impartial?”
Robot: “I am optimised for fairness.”
Billionaire: “And I am optimised for outages.”

What to watch, not the show

• Compute and data-centres as chokepoints: whoever owns them sets the terms.
• Capex arms races: “prudence” becomes “panic spending” with better branding.
• Labour market exposure without labour market power: retraining is promised, bargaining is optional.
• Regulation captured by complexity: if the rules need a PhD, the lobbyists win by default.
• Trust collapse: one high-profile hallucination can do more damage than a thousand correct answers.
• Politics as an ad market: democracy competing with targeted persuasion is a rigged sport.

The Hermit take

AI is not disappearing; it is sinking into everything like damp.
The real fight is not “AI good or bad”, it is “power audited or power hidden”.

Keep or toss

Keep / Toss
Keep the tools and the ambition.
Toss the fantasy that a machine can be a neutral king when its crown is plugged into someone else’s wall socket.

Sources

• IMF blog on AI and jobs: https://www.imf.org/en/blogs/articles/2024/01/14/ai-will-transform-the-global-economy-lets-make-sure-it-benefits-humanity
• IMF Staff Discussion Note (Gen-AI and work): https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/sdn/2024/english/sdnea2024001.pdf
• Reuters on AI buildout and spending: https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/great-ai-buildout-shows-no-sign-slowing-2025-10-31/
• UK government State Pension age review call for evidence: https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/third-state-pension-age-review-independent-report-call-for-evidence/third-state-pension-age-review-independent-report-call-for-evidence
• Forbes billionaires list 2025 explainer: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2025/04/01/forbes-39th-annual-worlds-billionaires-list-more-than-3000-worth-16-trillion/
• Church of England (Church Commissioners 2024 return and fund value): https://www.churchofengland.org/media/finance-news/church-commissioners-england-endowment-fund-delivers-103-return-2024
• The Fulcrum summary citing OpenSecrets projection: https://thefulcrum.us/money-politics/2024-election-spending