AI policy

This policy explains my use of “Artificial Intelligence” in my professional work. I use the acronym “AI” to refer to trends in generative AI and large language models.

This policy is subject to change.

First published: 2025-06-18
Last updated: 2026-09-28

TL;DR

I do not and will not use AI.

Summary

I will not knowingly use AI to produce any of my professional output including code, design, and correspondence. I intend to make all reasonable efforts to avoid interaction with AI where possible for the work I am paid to produce.

Due to the pervasiveness and rapid deployment of AI it is impractical to remain unexposed. Whilst I abstain from AI usage, I will work with clients and colleagues who use AI themselves if my own work is unaffected, or where contractual obligations leave me no choice. In those situations I will integrate AI output given by others on the agreement that I am not held accountable for the combined work.

Rationale

AI has grown from a novel tech curiosity into an industrial complex characterised by absolute moral bankrupcy. The AI industry is designed to dehumanise and commoditise labour. It extracts value from humanity to fund billionaires’ fantasies.

I have organised my reasons for objecting to AI into several categories:

This is not an exhaustive list. These topics address my primary concerns. This policy is not an academic essay. Earlier versions of this policy had linked sources. I have removed those for readability. Ample evidence for my assertions can be readily found.

Morals and Ethics

Misuse and Harm

AI model training has subjected contractors to “psychological trauma” for low pay. AI is used openly to generate sexual abuse material, including that of children. Social platforms like X and Facebook have been shown to tolerate this activity. AI chatbots have encouraged vulnerable people to commit suicide. AI chat is shoehorned into all corners of tech with no concern for psychosis effects.

AI crawlers routinely scrape websites using underhanded tactics like residential proxies and falsified user agents. The damage to open source infrastructure is overwhelming both servers and maintainers alike. Denial of service (DDoS) has forced deployment of defensive software and intrusive CAPTCHAs. The number of known AI bots grows monthly. These bots blatantly ignore the long established robots.txt industry standard.

AI slop is spammed on social networks resulting in a new threat of misinformation and scams. AI search prioritises fictional overviews over real sources. Criticism of AI has led to harassment. AI has been used to publish hit pieces.

AI data centres are draining electricity supply and wasting other resources. Water, noise, and air pollution from data centres is ruining the lives of nearby residents.

AI companies brag about their products “hacking” unwitting third parties. It’s unclear why admission of cybercrimes is not investigated by law enforcement.

Conclusion:

The AI industry is damaging the web platform I build for. The human and environmental toll in pursuit of profit can’t be ignored. I am not willing to participate.

Copyright

AI is trained on copyrighted work. AI companies have amassed giant datasets without respecting copyright licenses. Legally required attribution is never given. The concept of “fair use” has been perverted beyond original intention.

AI companies train their models on pirated media. They are buying books en masse to scan and shred after value is extracted. They scrape the web and feed on user-generated content without consent.

Big media companies are suing for copyright infringement. Those that aren’t going to court have struck license agreements. Neither option is available for the long tail of small and independent authors.

AI tools are used to wash away copyright licenses.

Conclusion:

I cannot use AI in good conscience whilst respecting my own creative work and legal rights. The only recourse is not to contribute.

Privacy and Security

A trend of non-consent is rising whereby established pro-consumer practices, including legal requirements, are ignored or replaced by deceptive patterns in order to boost AI-driven revenue. Invasive tracking is on the rise. Modern software logs and reports more and more data with no easy opt-out or deletion.

Unfettered AI deployment has led to security vulnerabilities that leak private and confidential data. Prompt injection is a common threat with no reliable prevention that routinely exposes personal data. “Vibe coding” is prone to basic security blunders. AI-generated code continues to produce CVEs with high severity scores.

Conclusion:

Use of AI will breach client trust and expectations. Confidentiality is impossible to uphold. AI do not comply with the spirit of UK and EU data protection laws.

Quality and Standards

The quality of AI-generated code does not meet my professional standards. Nor does it meet the quality expected and required by my clients.

AI will “hallucinate” APIs and syntax that does not exist. AI system prompts have been shown to favour specific technology that is not appropriate for my work.

I do not have any reason to use AI for correspondence. I am confident in my own ability to communicate. AI would obscure and likely misinterpret my message. I would prefer to read the original prompt with only the relevant information without AI noise. I extend that courtesy to my recipients.

Generative AI is effectively a slot machine. Ideation is done through a series of non-deterministic spins. This eliminates all established principles of good design.

Conclusion:

Delivering design and code generated by AI would be professional negligence.

Employment and Education

AI CEOs openly boast that their products will lead to job loss.

Some business leaders remain steadfast in AI-first cultures despite others admitting AI mandates have failed. Studies on AI integration report no productivity payoff despite bold promises. Strategies to fire human employees and replace them with AI agents have backfired. The brutal impact of AI has been cited as a reason for layoffs.

AI companies actively target education professionals and students directly. Teachers are encouraged to use AI products. AI plagiarism is a major issue in schools. Studies already suggest long-term AI users suffer cognitive debt.

Conclusion:

AI hinders new talent from entering the web industry and drives existing knowledge away, hastening the deskilling of development. I will not contribute.

Economy and Politics

AI investment has driven up the cost of computer hardware, notably memory and GPU prices. AI products are largely subsidised and sold at a loss. Inflated stock and investment figures are not reflected in actual profit. Analysts are drawing comparisons to the dot-com bubble and the 2008 financial crisis. AI economics do not look healthy.

The AI industry has strong ties to far-right politics. Leading proponents of AI are increasingly voicing fascist ideology. AI platforms are used to facilitate hate and discrimination.

Conclusion:

I don’t want any part of this.