The dystopian visions of Hollywood often involve killer robots, but a more insidious threat may be the rise of a high-tech feudalism, where a handful of corporations control the digital infrastructure of modern life. This warning comes from John Mac Ghlionn, a writer and researcher who argues that AI's rapid advancement could lead to a society where individuals rent access to essential tools but never own them, becoming increasingly dependent on proprietary systems.
Ghlionn points to the social media era as a cautionary tale. From 2012 to 2023, teen depression rates spiked, coinciding with the rise of algorithms that seemed to know everything about users. Leaked Meta documents from 2021 revealed that executives were aware their design choices were harming young users' mental health, yet they kept engagement loops running to maximize ad revenue. An entire generation traded its well-being for likes and clicks, a trade-off that Ghlionn argues is a prelude to something worse.
While social media hijacked our attention, AI is coming for the rest of the operating system. Generative models can create synthetic realities and personalized companions that mimic human affection, potentially replacing real human interaction. A teenager could spend all day talking to a custom bot that remembers every secret, gradually eroding the need for real relationships. AI monopolizes human cognition, influencing how people think and act, and making users entirely dependent on proprietary software for even the most basic tasks.
As machines get smarter, humans risk getting dumber, and the architects of this new order profit handsomely. OpenAI is now valued at $852 billion, with Microsoft committing over $13 billion for access to its models. Anthropic, Meta, Alphabet, and Amazon spend tens of billions annually on computing infrastructure to maintain dominance. These corporations operate to maximize shareholder value, often ignoring staff concerns about the ethical implications of their work. Wall Street demands exponential growth, and executives deliver it by locking users into addictive ecosystems.
History suggests this pattern is all too familiar. In 1998, tobacco companies settled after decades of marketing addictive products to teenagers. In 2008, banks crashed the mortgage market and received taxpayer bailouts while millions lost homes. Corporate actors consistently pursue short-term profits while shifting long-term costs onto the public. Why would tech be any different?
Tech executives urge the public to trust their internal ethics committees, even as insiders express deep concerns about where AI could lead. The pace of progress is staggering; it is plausible that within a decade, these systems will outperform humans in nearly every task. The cost of building advanced AI systems creates an insurmountable barrier to entry, ensuring that a few mega-corporations control the digital backbone of civilization. Every search, every automated workflow will pass through servers owned by four or five giants.
This dominance over information is unprecedented. Neither the Industrial Revolution nor the internet concentrated this much power over human knowledge and decision-making in so few private hands. The scenario requires no Terminators, only compliant consumers paying monthly fees to let their AI assistant tell them what to say and how to think.
As the debate over AI regulation intensifies, with AI scams draining billions from Americans, the stakes could not be higher. The question is whether policymakers will act to prevent a high-tech feudalism or allow a few corporations to dictate the future of human cognition.
