AI’s backward-looking face, weathered and lined with memory, is indeed a bubble about to burst. This side of AI is engaged in standard capitalist commodity production. A ChatGPT subscription is a commodity like any other: like a subscription to The New York Times, a car insurance contract, or a lease on some car. But in January last year Chinese start-up DeepSeek disrupted the AI-commodity market with a free service far less costly to produce and as good quality as ChatGPT. It was then that Big Tech realized their prospects as suppliers of AI-based commodities (or subscription services) were over.

There is now clear evidence that companies such as OpenAI which are in the business of selling AI subscriptions have been excessively marked up. As the costs of Large Language Models (LLMs) increase exponentially, the subscription revenues increase more or less linearly. This is unsustainable and there always comes a moment when the unsustainable can no longer be sustained. At that point, AI’s wrinkly, backward-looking face will sag, maybe die altogether.

More from this author

Big Tech are the new Soviets

By Yanis Varoufakis

What about AI’s second face? After the DeepSeek moment fired the starting gun, AI firms began to shift their technologies from the economy’s capitalist market sector to the pre-existing technofeudal economy. Well before LLMs could emulate human-like interaction, cloud capital interfaces such as Alexa, Siri, Google’s Assistant or Amazon’s web-based algorithm had already empowered Big Tech to extract significant cloud rents from the rest of us. Once you entered amazon.com, you exited capitalism. But now AI’s second face allows Big Tech to escalate its extractive powers.

Consider what an advanced AI-powered version of a bot like Alexa will very soon be able to do. Not only will it know you perfectly but it will be able to speak to you in a manner that is virtually indistinguishable to that of a human as well. It will remember everything you’ve ever said, done or wished for, and it will be able to go back years. It will have perfect recall of your whims, musical sensibilities, shopping habits and disappointments. It will keep you company in both good and bad moments. It will be able to predict when one of its recommendations will jar with you. It will take you to the brink of your tolerance without crossing your red lines.

This is light years beyond mere surveillance capitalism, an earlier system where machines spied on you so that advertisers could target their marketing material. With an AI-enabled interface, Amazon, Meta and Google will soon interact with you in ways that today seem as unfathomable as computer scientists found eight years ago the spectacle of AlphaZero teaching itself from scratch how to play chess by itself, shifting beyond all 3,000 years of human chess within 24 hours.

With this kind of power hidden under their human-like bonhomie, Alexa-like AI bots will speedily cultivate in you a neuro-dependence. They will become indispensable to your psyche. Switching to a competitor’s competing bot will be almost unthinkable — closer to a heart-wrenching divorce than to finding another e-shop to buy stuff from. At that point, all hope that market competition has a future dies.

Massive economies of scale are synonymous with natural monopoly — it’s one of the few useful things we teach economics students at university. That’s the reason why we cannot have several water companies competing in the same city, laying down different water pipes that run through our streets and walls. For similar reasons, a handful of Big Tech hyper-scalers own and control the means of production of AI. For any company or startup wanting to build a serious AI capability, accessing these hyperscalers’ infrastructure is not just convenient, but a fundamental necessity. This gives them immense influence over the pace, cost, and direction of AI’s second face.

Forward looking, clear-eyed, expectant and immune to the AI bubble’s bursting, AI’s second face is eyeing paths not yet taken into a near future that we can scarcely imagine. More intriguingly, it is focusing on a realm that has little to do with what we can usefully describe as capitalist markets. We have plenty of proof that this is already happening. A good case in point is Instacart, a corporation which has brought brick-and-mortar groceries into the technofeudal sector, spreading AI-enabled cloud capital across thousands of retailers, of all sizes and localities. The result is a form of price discrimination so extreme that it annuls the most basic features of a capitalist market.

This practice of “perfect price optimization” is now emulated by every major retailer in the United States and beyond. Instacart not only extracts what economists call “consumer surplus” (the difference between the price that the consumer pays and the maximum price the consumer is willing to pay) but, far more importantly, it renders price competition next to impossible. Able to recollect every consumer’s behavioral pattern, it follows a pricing pattern that prevents you from comparing prices across persons or timeframes within, but also across, shops and platforms. As if that were not enough, Instacart enables physical retailers and digital platforms alike to collude — sometimes unbeknownst even to their managers — in ways that the naked eye cannot discern. The system is designed to be unseen, indiscernible; an irresistible solvent of anything that can be described as a market mechanism.

AI’s second face, the technofeudal one, is prevailing and will continue to do so after any bust of the AI bubble. It could not be otherwise. Given a choice between the precarious profits that any start-up, like DeepSeek, can dissolve overnight and the cloud rents that AI-enabled machines can lock in for the long run, Big Tech opted for the latter. Any company that, today, continues to try to profit by supplying AI-based commodities will either have to switch to extracting cloud rents in the technofeudal sector or perish.

What does this mean for us, for humanity’s future? The tech-optimists are convinced that AI will usher us into new vistas of pleasure, productivity and wealth. But I cannot share their cheerfulness.

Here’s why. The economy’s traditional capitalist and AI-powered technofeudal sectors are engaged in a dynamic conflict: value is created in the latter and usurped by the former. When profitability in the capitalist sector rises above some threshold, AI-powered cloud capital overaccumulates in the technofeudal sector and the rate of cloud rent extraction eventually falls. And when the AI-cloud-rent extraction rates fall below some other threshold, productive capital (including AI-driven machines) is drawn to the capitalist sector, thus pushing down the rate of profit. And so on.

Suggested Reading

How Big Tech killed literary culture

By Nicholas Carr

It resembles a clash between predators and their prey. When the predators feast insatiably on their prey, the prey dwindles causing the predators to starve, eventually. The prey population then recovers only to give the predators another opportunity to gobble them up. Is there an end-state to this cyclical dynamic? I think so: systemic collapse.

The intuition behind my bleak prognosis is simple. Big Tech’s greatest achievement is the success of its machines and AI-algorithms in recruiting billions of us to work for free — posting videos, writing reviews, submitting texts — thus increasing its capacity to extract cloud rents. But what happens as the ratio of AI-driven cloud rents to Big Tech’s wage bill increases? Society’s aggregate spending power falls, the trajectory of the capitalist enterprises’ profit rate dips and, eventually, Big Tech’s cloud rents also decline. The volatility and secular stagnation that was always endemic to capitalism will, in this manner, graduate to a doom loop of collapsing cloud rents and capitalist profits.

That’s the story of AI’s second face and how a stupendous technology with Promethean capabilities will end up, in all probability, Daedalian. In ancient myth, Prometheus personified the hope that technology would be humanity’s enabler. Though Promethean himself, Daedalus, the genius engineer who built the Labyrinth for King Minos to contain the Minotaur, became trapped in his own edifice. Even when he invented flying machines for himself and his son Icarus to escape from Crete, it ended in tragedy. So too today with AI. Promethean engineers invented and developed it only for AI’s second, uglier, face to imprison them — as well as the rest of us — inside a hyper-complex, enveloping, labyrinthine technological system.

And so when friends ask me why I bother with electoral politics, which they know I dislike intensely, I reply that there is only one route from the Daedalian prison to the Promethean ideal: radical democratic politics. “Which means what?”, they ask. It means starting with small regulatory steps, like legislating interoperability or rescinding legislation that heightens Big Tech’s exorbitant power, before moving on to the grander tasks of building a digital monetary commons and re-thinking property rights over data and cloud capital. Only then will we have a shot at turning AI into humanity’s benign enabler.

Many factors have contributed to this predicament. But the ultimate cause lies in human intelligence, the germ and sap of the great hard oak that is, or was, the West (it’s old now, and growing soft with rot). That intelligence is a curse as well as a blessing was clear enough to the ancient Greeks and Hebrews, whose oldest legends drew vital meaning from the black earth, the primordial fundament of early human experience.

The origin myths of Genesis and Hesiod explain how the first human beings, wanting more, broke with God or the gods. It was a kind of primitive artificial intelligence that caused this quarrel: the combination of art and artifice that has always characterised the schemes of the human mind. Impelled not just by need, but by ungoverned desires, we came to rely on cunning deception and the use of tools to imitate things and living beings — skills that have always been essential, for example, in hunting, fishing, and warfare. The myths also teach that each advance — fossil-fuel power plants, for example, or the free-for-all of the internet — produces real or perceived problems that invite increasingly large-scale scientific and political “solutions”.

Seen in this light, recent developments such as the rush of American and European governments to transition to clean energy and electric vehicles, the emerging threat of a stealthy, two-pronged attack by electronic as well as biological viruses, the extensive manipulations or “nudges” of post-modern technocracy, and the employment of AI for the purpose of “information warfare”, are entirely unsurprising.

Hesiod tells a story from the Golden Age, before poverty, sickness and death came into the world, and gods and men (there were no women then) feasted together. The Titan Prometheus was the priestly master of ceremonies, in charge of dividing and distributing meat to the two parties, mortals and immortals. This office suited his presumably impartial nature: he was a god, but a philanthropic one with a recognisably human mind. In fact, he is not easily distinguished from man himself. Prometheus means Forethought, yet he saw only what was visible in the blaze of his cleverness. This is why, in myth, his brother Epimetheus — Afterthought — follows him through the dark like a comet’s tail of foolishness, constantly spoiling his work with unintended consequences.

On the occasion Hesiod relates, Prometheus came up with an ingenious fraud, a trick designed to hoodwink Zeus himself. He roasted portions of meat from an ox and arranged the pieces into two parts. He stuffed all the meat into the animal’s inedible stomach: a deliberately unappetising sight, emblematic of man’s insatiable hunger. In the other part, he hid the animal’s bones beneath its deliciously crispy fat. Then he asked Zeus to choose between the two portions. Zeus saw through Prometheus’s trick. Stung by the insult, but playing a long game of justice, he chose the fat-covered bones.

The success of Prometheus’s grasping scheme came at a price he seems not to have anticipated. An earthquake in cosmic relations, it ended the convivial co-existence of gods and men. The Greeks preserved the memory of this signal event in the sacrificial ritual of burning fat and bones. This practice confirmed that, while we mortals are slaves of our stomachs, the gods have no need of our food. But Zeus would have found cold comfort in the thought that he is honoured by being cheated of the pleasures of taste. Allowing the Olympians to enjoy the savour but not the flavour of feasts is like barring them from sex because they don’t need to reproduce. Concealment being conatal with the earliest arts, it is no accident that Zeus subsequently hid fire from human beings, or that Prometheus stole it back.

More from this author

Welcome to Fahrenheit 2023

By Jacob Howland

Zeus exercised merciful forbearance in allowing us to keep control of fire. But he was not finished with us. He instructed Hephaestus, the divine craftsman, to fashion a woman — Pandora — from the earth, in the likeness of a goddess, an echo of the Bible’s “in the image of God he created them”. And what an image! Athena dressed Pandora in rich robes, a fine veil, and fresh flowers; Hephaestus fashioned a wondrous gold crown for her, on which the animals of the earth and sea were depicted “like living beings with voices”. Thus adorned, she was “sheer guile, irresistible to human beings”. In accepting this gift of the gods, a mistake Hesiod attributes to Epimetheus, man brought into his life the miseries of old age, strife, toil, illness, and death — all of them hidden, like bones beneath fat, under Pandora’s lovely flesh, or in her infamous box. Zeus repaid Prometheus tit for tat: woman was “a beautiful evil in exchange for the good”.

This is much more than misogyny, although it certainly is that. Pandora and her splendid crown embody the deceptive allure of technical ingenuity. She is the object not just of sexual desire, but even more, of lust for the godlike power afforded by advanced technical skill. (In The Odyssey, Hephaestus invents the world’s first robots.) That power, or the secure prospect thereof, became the possession of human beings the minute Prometheus stole “undying fire” from Zeus, for the control of fire is the essential precondition of anything more than rudimentary development of the arts and sciences.

This is not all. In Greek myth, Pandora’s garments register as symbols of nomos: the laws and customs that protect us from human harshness, just as clothes shield our skin from thorns and thistles. These protections are matters of political wisdom or prudence, a virtue that was unnecessary in the Golden Age. Both technical expertise and politics are basic means of existence in the hardscrabble life that opens before us upon our divorce from the gods, a life in which we must labour to secure food and shelter, fight predators (including the human sort), suffer injurious blows and ward off sickness, only to succumb, inevitably, to death. Yet political wisdom remains elusive to this day. The fundamental meaning of the myth is clear. The good of the arts and applied sciences is inseparable from the ills they both combat and exacerbate. We Prometheans have been bested. Zeus, king of gods and men, and dikē (justice), the unforgiving structure of the real world, have the last laugh.

The story of the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden covers the same ground, and sounds many of the same themes, as the myths of Prometheus and Pandora. This tale, too, begins when human beings lived in the company of God, and tells the story of their divorce. The biblical God divided the watery chaos to fashion a world, but he never divided human beings from himself. That was once again the work of human intelligence, which, as Hesiod saw, is irresistibly attracted to beautiful evils. Woman plays a key role in this drama, although she is not a punishment for hubris, as in Hesiod, but a vehicle of it. And technical skill again proves to be a necessary compensation for the ills that mortals are heir to when they leave the divine presence.

Adam and Eve at first lived in direct communion with God, who walked in the Garden seeking their company, until the day they hid from him after eating of the forbidden tree. To Eve, the tree of knowledge “was lust to the eyes” (in the translation of Robert Alter) as well as good for eating and lovely to look at. This recalls Pandora, whom Hesiod described as “an evil in which all may delight at heart”. Adam and Eve hoped to “become as gods”, but this is another case of “be careful what you wish for”. Here, however, is something not in Hesiod: they immediately felt shame before God, and hid their genitals, and themselves, behind fig-leaves and pretexts. They must have learned these tricks of art and artifice from eating the fruit of knowledge of good and evil. That seductive fruit is a strange, bittersweet hybrid of benefit and ill. It gives us the technical power to become prosthetic gods, as Freud says — but forgetful ones, reaching for some distant good but constantly plagued by afterthoughts. Politically, it demands that we build and maintain, if only out of shame, something resembling a habitable space of minimal peace and order.

God brought order to chaos in fashioning the universe and laying out the Garden. Ejected from paradise, Adam and Eve were obliged to imitate his work, even if crudely. God showed them how to make garments of animal skin — a skill they would need to protect their bodies, and a sign that they had now broken with the beasts as well as God. Otherwise, they were on their own.

The first couple wanted knowledge of good and evil and they got it, in spades. With Cain’s murder of Abel, they experienced a breakdown of moral order that could be remedied only by the slow work of politics in the broadest sense: education and character formation. Ever since then, human beings have tried to correct the chaotic motions of the microcosms of psyche and society. They have been compelled to sort chaos and so become as gods (as the serpent, whom the Talmudic sages associated with lust, promised they would) — or, in a variant reading, as kings (elohim means both).

But we mortals aren’t gods, and we generally make poor kings. Left to our own devices, we turn our existence into something nasty and brutish. Exiled from the presence of the Lord, Cain founded the first city, and his descendants were artisans who developed skills in metalwork, music, and herding. But technical competence does not imply, much less substitute for, moral or political soundness. Cain’s great-great-great-grandson Lamech was a violent boaster, and in later ages, giants did evil so great that it corrupted the very earth and “filled [it] with outrage”.

After God cleansed the earth with the Flood, he formed a covenant with Noah and his sons, and gave them moral instruction in the form of the so-called Noahide commandments. But Noah’s single-minded descendants lacked political prudence, and confused healthy order with hive-like uniformity. They tried to build a great Tower at Babel to scrape the sky and ward off destruction, whether from God or other men is unclear. This massive project of social and material engineering, an abomination to God, resulted in the city’s collapse into universal incoherence, anarchy, and the dispersion of its inhabitants. Human life, Scripture teaches, isn’t reducible to high walls of densely packed man-bricks, made, like Adam, from the soil (adamah), not with a divine Word but with trowel, chalk, and level.

Suggested reading

How the truth fell into disrepute

By Terry Eagleton

So why are we intent on building Babel yet again — on constructing an increasingly artificial and fragmented world in which digital babble and propaganda drown out truth, and social order gives way to chaos? The beginning, Plato wrote, is the most important part of every work, not least because those who go wrong at the outset find it difficult to recover. This is especially true if the mistake is discovered after millennia, when long habit must be corrected no less than nature. Nor does it help that our age is too proud, and too rushed, to notice the past as it marches toward the future: the digitally mediated, electronically controlled, increasingly virtual apotheosis of AI-powered technocracy.

This is a grave concern, but not yet cause for despair. In Scripture, God offers the revelation of law and, in the New Testament, of incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection. And the consolation of Hesiod is that human intelligence has a natural core that is not limited to overreaching appetite. The Greek myths themselves express a deep and broad intelligence, one that acknowledges the limits of art and artifice, and subordinates itself to a higher good. In this way, they give us hope — the last thing left in Pandora’s box — that long-sedimented character need not be destiny for human beings.