# Cory Doctorow’s New Book Exposes Who Really Benefits from AI > Source: > Published: 2026-07-20 19:23:22+00:00 **July 21, 2026, (Inside AI) —** Science fiction author and tech journalist Cory Doctorow has launched a new conceptual weapon against the AI industry’s grand promises. In his latest book, **The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to Life After AI: How to Think About Artificial Intelligence Before it is Too Late**, Doctorow argues that most people are being turned into servants of machines, not masters. Doctorow, who previously coined the term **Enshittification** to describe platform decay, now introduces the “reverse centaur.” The concept draws on freestyle chess, where a human-computer team is called a centaur. Doctorow defines a centaur as “a person who is assisted by a machine.” The reverse centaur, however, is a person “conscripted to act as an assistant to a machine.” The book arrives amid a cultural moment where Greek myths are back in vogue, thanks partly to Christopher Nolan’s film adaptation of **The Odyssey**. Doctorow’s centaur metaphor cuts through AI hype by asking a simple question: Who is really in control? ## From Centaur to Reverse Centaur: The Hidden Power Shift Doctorow illustrates the reverse centaur with a famous scene from the classic American series **I Love Lucy**. In it, characters frantically wrap chocolates from a conveyor belt. They are not using the machine; the machine is using them. This, Doctorow says, is the true role big tech envisions for most people in an AI-driven economy. He argues that AI is being sold with a sense of “inevitabilism,” echoing **Margaret Thatcher’s** slogan “there is no alternative.” But this narrative, he insists, is driven by political and economic interests, not technical necessity. Big tech, he claims, wants us to believe we will become empowered centaurs, while actually turning us into reverse centaurs. The book dissects the economics behind the AI boom, calling current valuations a result of “accounting gimmicks,” “deception,” and “disruption.” The real goal, Doctorow writes, is to replace employees with software and slash payrolls, even though the technology is not yet ready to substitute human intelligence. Doctorow is not anti-AI. He admits to using an AI model called **Whisper**, which he found “delightful.” He also defends AI-generated creativity, noting that art is fundamentally a human act of communication. His critique targets the business models and power structures, not the technology itself. ## The Economics of an AI Bubble Doctorow describes the current moment as an “AI bubble,” inflated by companies like **Google**, **Meta**, and **Microsoft** to keep cash flowing. He explains complex economic ideas with simple examples. For instance, he unpacks **Goodhart’s Law**—“when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure”—using everyday scenarios that make the concept stick. The book’s tone is sharp and satirical, much like Doctorow’s earlier work on Enshittification. He serves data in bite-sized portions, never overwhelming readers. This approach makes dense economic and technical information feel light and digestible. Doctorow’s central warning is stark. He writes: **“The job of a good AI critic is to help pop the bubble as quickly as possible, before the walls of all our institutions are filled with this digital asbestos that we’ll be digging out for generations.”** This echoes concerns raised by other industry critics. Researcher **Emily Bender** has warned about the dangers of treating large language models as intelligent, while economist **Daron Acemoglu** has argued that AI’s productivity gains are often overstated. Doctorow’s “reverse centaur” adds a new layer: it is not just about overhyped capabilities, but about who gets to decide how AI is deployed. The book also touches on labor displacement. A **2025 study by the International Labour Organization** found that while AI may augment some jobs, it risks automating many clerical and administrative roles, disproportionately affecting women. Doctorow’s reverse centaur framework suggests that even augmented workers may end up serving the machine’s logic rather than their own. Some may find Doctorow’s take too cynical. Yet he makes a compelling case for pushing back against what he calls “Reverse Centaurification.” The term may lack the viral catchiness of Enshittification, but its point is urgent: the AI revolution is not a neutral force. It is a power struggle, and most of us are being enlisted on the wrong side. The book is a must-read for anyone wondering why AI is being pushed with such intensity. It is a warning for those blindly buying into the AI narrative, and a guide for those seeking to understand the power, politics, and economics behind the algorithms.