/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

A look at generative AI's impact, its structural issue of concentrated power among just a few companies, and utopian questions over an alternative vision for AI

Critiques of artificial intelligence abound.  Where's the utopian vision for what it could be?

Boston Review Evgeny Morozov

Context & Ripple Effects

This critique moves the generative-AI debate beyond near-term capability claims toward who controls the technology and what social purpose it serves. Earlier coverage warned against building institutions around an assumption of transformative AI, while another account framed its promise and risks as more limited than the surrounding fervor suggested.

It also follows scrutiny of the ethical and legal implications of systems that make previously small-scale creation possible at mass scale, captured in earlier analysis of generative AI's scaling effects. The significance here is the link between that scale and the ownership structure behind it.

First-order effects

  • The article gives concentrated corporate control a more central place in assessments of generative AI, alongside technical capability, harms, and hype.
  • It presses advocates and critics to articulate an affirmative alternative for AI rather than treating critique of current systems as a sufficient program.

Second-order effects

  • Debate over AI deployment is likely to put greater weight on whether access, governance, and benefits are broadly distributed rather than on model performance alone.
  • Organizations evaluating AI may face stronger pressure to distinguish practical uses from claims that normalize dependence on a small set of providers.

Third-order effects

  • If this framing persists, AI competition will increasingly be understood as an infrastructure-and-governance question: who owns essential systems, who can shape them, and whether alternatives can remain viable.
  • The durable divide may be between AI organized as concentrated commercial infrastructure and AI treated as a shared or publicly accountable resource; the corpus does not establish which model will prevail.

The trend: Generative AI discourse is shifting from fascination with capabilities toward contestation over ownership, governance, and the public vision that should guide deployment.

Discussion

  • @markanthonyneal Mark Anthony Neal on bluesky
    “Early AI focused on replicating the intelligence of a fully committed, emotionally detached office worker—a species of William Whyte's “organization man”.”  @bostonreview.bsky.social  —  www.bostonreview.net/forum/the- ai...
  • @davidakin @davidakin on bluesky
    Great Morozov essay on AI and democracy: “the ability of AI to run ideological interference for the prevailing order, whether bureaucracy in its early days or the market today, poses the greatest threat.” #longread www.bostonreview.net/forum/the- ai...
  • @sanlambert Sandrine Lambert on bluesky
    “Technology's emancipatory potential will only be secured through a radical political project.Without one, we are unlikely to gather the resources necessary to ensure that the agendas of the Efficiency Lobby don't overpower those of the Humanity Lobby” E. Morozov www.bostonreview…
  • @pettter @pettter on bluesky
    Excellent essay by Evgeny Morozov on the history and potential (and historically potential) futures of #AI.  Also many well-written and independently interesting responses.  —  www.bostonreview.net/forum/the- ai...
  • @jathansadowski.com Jathan Sadowski on bluesky
    Fascinating, long essay by Evgeny Morozov exploring how the history of AI gives us a technology designed for instrumental reason, and how some alternative choices could have given—and still could give—us very different and far better forms of human-centred AI: www.bostonreview.ne…
  • @saaphilosophy @saaphilosophy on x
    “Incidentally, it's the American pragmatists who got closest to describing the operations of ecological reason. Had the early AI community paid any attention to John Dewey and his work on “embodied intelligence,” many false leads might have been avoided.” https://www.bostonreview…
  • @evgenymorozov Evgeny Morozov on x
    “The AI We Deserve” - my essay for Boston Review https://www.bostonreview.net/ ...
  • @neilturkewitz Neil Turkewitz on x
    Interesting piece about the limits of instrumentality/rationality & why efficiency as our guide for AI development is poorly suited for radical thinking about the exploration of potential paths to understanding ourselves & the world. 👀 @ChombaBupe [image]
  • @evgenymorozov Evgeny Morozov on x
    Dissecting generative AI with Veblen, Dewey, Hayek, Heidegger and others - my latest for @BostonReview https://www.bostonreview.net/ ...
  • @bostonreview @bostonreview on x
    The forum in our latest issue, AI FUTURES, is now online. Big Tech's tools are remaking the economy, society, and human life as we know it. Against both realists and refuseniks, @evgenymorozov presents a utopian vision for what AI could be: https://www.bostonreview.net/ ...