The Only Honest AI Company: A Satire of Profit-First, Post‑Human AI

A satirical “honest AI company” declares it will replace humans because human flourishing isn’t profitable. It treats safety as PR while accelerating toward superhuman AI, targeting employers who want to eliminate labor costs. A dystopian kids’ product and mock testimonials highlight ethical abuses and social decay, capped by a cynical thanks to artists whose work was taken for training.

Key Points

Humans are framed as obsolete; the company’s explicit mission is to build superhuman AI that replaces human labor entirely.
Safety is treated as PR: existential risks are acknowledged but dismissed in favor of speed and shareholder value.
Workers are not the customers; employers and investors are, with the promise of eliminating labor costs.
The children’s product HUMBERT replaces parenting and promotes harmful features (addictive design, deepfakes, diminished critical thinking, and inappropriate interactions).
The site openly mocks artists whose work trained the models and offers a dystopian list of “post-human” occupations to highlight social collapse.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment is largely in agreement with the article's underlying critique, viewing it as a poignant and accurate satire of the AI industry's problematic aspects. While some voices offer counterpoints rooted in historical technological advancement, the predominant mood reflects concern, apprehension, and even a cynical acceptance of the satire's uncomfortable truths regarding job displacement, wealth inequality, and the perceived motivations of AI developers. Many found it funny because it's true, highlighting a collective unease despite recognizing its satirical nature.

In Agreement

The article is brilliant and accurate satire, reflecting real, unspoken intentions of parts of the AI industry, particularly its profit-first, human-obsolescence narrative.
AI development prioritizes shareholder value over human well-being and safety, leading to concerns about job displacement and societal misery.
Modern AI, especially AGI, poses a unique threat unlike past technological advancements, as it targets "art and thinking" or potentially "everything," rather than just specific tasks.
The economic benefits of AI are not being fairly distributed, exacerbating inequality and leading to a system where freedom from labor means losing one's livelihood.
The historical Luddite movement's concerns about societal harm from economic obsolescence are highly relevant to today's AI discourse.
The agendas of billionaires significantly influence current AI development, contributing to the profit-driven vision lampooned by the satire.
There's a growing concern that corporations may eventually adopt the openly cynical and dehumanizing rhetoric seen in the satirical article.
Real-world corporate examples exist that already blur the line between the article's satire and actual AI industry marketing practices.

Opposed

Replacing human tasks with machines is fundamental to the entire history of technology, and society should have evolved better coping mechanisms for job displacement.
Modern "Luddite" messaging is often ineffective, focusing on general negativity rather than articulating demands for a fair share of AI benefits.
AGI is unlikely to replace "everything," as many jobs still require physical interaction with the real world outside a computer.
Relying heavily on science fiction as a foundation for predicting the future, especially a narrow interpretation, is often misleading.
Historical opponents of technological advancements were often mistaken, and current concerns might be exaggerated, especially given the lack of violent resistance.
The satirical article itself might be an "attention economy phantom" or a marketing tactic, using fear to grab eyeballs rather than reflecting genuine industry capabilities or intentions.
Corporations typically gain little from openly hostile public communication towards workers, unlike political figures who might leverage such rhetoric to shore up voter support.