-
You might be able to successfully do that degree without having to study too hard. You might have great art in your home, which was cheap because there was no human working on it for multiple weeks. You might look very successful because your LinkedIn engagement is skyrocketing and you AI-generated posts are taking off. - But what is the point?
It makes things seamlessly easy, while I truly believe in the power of doing hard things. -
AI might make work less meaningful. What are the effects of AI in changing your experience to work and its meaning to you?
AI Trends for 2026: Building 'Change Fitness' and Balancing Trade-Offs
Our comfort with friction is under attack. [...] Generative AI raises an overlapping question: Who are we when we forfeit the friction of thinking? (In 2026, We Are Friction-Maxxing, by Kathryn Jezer-Morton in The Cut)
The task that generative A.I. has been most successful at is lowering our expectations, both of the things we read and of ourselves when we write anything for others to read. It is a fundamentally dehumanizing technology because it treats us as less than what we are: creators and apprehenders of meaning. It reduces the amount of intention in the world. (Ted Chiang, in "Why AI Isn't Going To Make Art" in NYT)
I think in order to seriously oppose AI, and to have a chance of sustaining that principled opposition as it grows and improves and becomes more useful, more accurate, more entertaining, we will have to oppose the system that makes it feel necessary. This, in turn, will require a re-orientation of priorities — an acceptance of friction and boredom and momentary dissatisfaction, a conscious valuing of labour, an interest in complexity, a divestment from the logics of the platforms that profit off of our atomized attention.