The artificial intelligence conversation has officially hit its disillusionment phase, and Daniel Miessler wants you to know that might be the worst thing that could happen to you. As he outlined in a June 25 essay, we're watching people split into two distinct camps: those who see AI as an essential upgrade to their capabilities, and those convinced it's just another Crypto/NFT grift job. The problem? Miessler thinks one of these groups is making a catastrophic mistake.
The Skeptic's Trap
Miessler gets itβthe hundreds of billions sloshing around in AI financing do smell funky. "Noticing that danger and being concerned about it is healthy," he writes. But he's watching people take that perfectly reasonable skepticism and stretch it into full-blown dismissal, treating AI as something safe to ignore or mock. That's the dangerous part. Because while skeptics are patting themselves on the back for spotting the bubble, the other camp is quietly shipping more work, solving harder problems, and opening doors they didn't know existed.
Reading vs. Non-Readers: An Analogy With Exponents
Miessler's framing hits hard: "Talking to someone who reads 20β50 good books a year is nothing like talking to someone who hasn't read a book since school made them." Different worlds. Different opportunities. Like they're from different planets. Now apply an exponent to that gap. Being AI-native, Miessler argues, delivers the opportunity boost of a voracious reader multiplied many times overβand anecdotal evidence suggests the people already consuming books like oxygen are largely the same ones fully wired into AI tools today.
Watching It Play Out in Real-Time
"I'm watching it happen," Miessler says. The difference isn't abstract; it's concrete. It's what people think is possible, and it's what they ship every single weekβhow much they're building, how much they're creating. This isn't just tech bros cranking out apps, either. Completely non-technical people who are "fully wired up with AI" are simply more productive at whatever their actual work happens to be. The tools don't care about your background.
The Uncomfortable Truth About Fairness
Miessler doesn't shy away from the ugly part: "It feels gross to me. It feels unfair." A new technology that amplifies some people's capabilities while others deliberately opt out? That's not a comfortable dynamic. But he argues the solution isn't to pretend the gap doesn't existβit's to evangelize harder. Pull more people away from the "just a phase" narrative and the "AI is evil for society" crowd.
Treat It Binary (Almost)
Miessler's takeaway: treat AI adoption as close to binary as possible. Not because nuance doesn't exist, but because framing matters. You get yourself and your people into the AI-native camp. Or you likely struggle badly in the coming years. This doesn't mean treating AI "like Jesus"βit comes with real moral complications and dangers of over-use. But think of it like a pill that makes you smarter. Or 100 brilliant interns who'll help you do whatever you want. Use them.
The Bottom Line
This isn't about hype or FOMOβthis is about capability parity. If you're deliberately sidelining yourself from AI tools right now, you're not being contrarian and insightful; you're voluntarily hobbling yourself while everyone else levels up. The divide Miessler describes is real, it's accelerating, and the time to pick a side is running out.