Source: The Guardian
Summary
The creator of an open source document editor stated it will not include AI in the default settings of its software, according to a report. The decision was made to protect user privacy, the company said. The software is widely used for collaborative writing and editing. The statement comes amid growing concerns over AI integration in productivity tools. The company has not ruled out future AI features, but they will not be enabled by default.
Our Reading
The announcement sounds ambitious.
No AI in the default settings. Big deal.
Privacy first, they say. Again.
Same old, just rebranded.
They’re not adding AI. They’re just not adding it yet.
Author: Evan Null
Rebranding Privacy as a Feature
The company claims to value user privacy, but this is not a new stance. Many open source projects have long avoided AI for similar reasons. The statement is less about innovation and more about avoiding controversy. Users who want AI can enable it later, but the default remains clean. This is not a rejection of AI, just a delay. The company is not against AI—it’s just not ready for prime time.
AI is Not New, But It’s Always New
Every time a company says they’re not adding AI, it’s just another way of saying they’re not adding it yet. The same companies that once claimed to be privacy-focused are now pushing AI features. The difference is in the timing. This is not a refusal of AI—it’s a refusal to be the first. The company is playing it safe, not because they care about privacy, but because they don’t want to be the one to break the AI wave.
The Same Old Script
Open source projects often make bold statements about user control and privacy. But when the market shifts, so do their priorities. This is not a unique stance. It’s a standard move in the tech industry. The company is not against AI—it’s just not ready to be the first. The same logic applies to every other feature that gets delayed. The only difference is the word “AI” is now the new buzzword.
Privacy as a Marketing Tool
Privacy is no longer a principle—it’s a selling point. Companies use it to justify decisions they otherwise wouldn’t make. This is not about protecting users; it’s about positioning. The company is not rejecting AI—it’s rejecting the idea of being the first to implement it. This is a common tactic. It’s not about ethics; it’s about timing. The same companies that once said “no AI” will eventually say “yes AI” when the market demands it.
The Future is Just the Past in Disguise
Every time a company says they’re not adding AI, it’s just another way of saying they’re not adding it yet. The same companies that once claimed to be privacy-focused are now pushing AI features. The difference is in the timing. This is not a rejection of AI—it’s a delay. The company is not against AI—it’s just not ready for prime time. The only difference is the word “AI” is now the new buzzword.
