AI definitely came first to mind, but it really fits the broader ethos of modern Big Tech. They claim to offer "innovation," "productivity," "connection," and all those good things. But they design their products for self-serving purposes. They don't offer tools that only serve one master: the user.

Plausible accusation, but I don't think those are mutually-exclusive. I think there is a non-zero-sum space where both sides benefit. But yeah, "The Social Dilemma (2020)" is a perfect example of suggesting that things may have gone too far.

Such a space exists, but it's crowded out in the current economics of tech. If I buy a hammer at Home Depot, then I benefit and the hammer manufacturer benefits. And when I take the hammer home, it's entirely mine to use entirely on my terms in perpetuity, regardless of the manufacturer's desires. The hammer company is incentivized to sell me a product that serves me well.

That's not how it works in tech. Vendors and manufacturers always have a way to claw back features, value, and data from the user. Even for paid products and services. Unlike in the hammer industry, tech users are resources to extract, not necessarily customers to serve.