I disagree: in as much as I have noticed this *far* more with AI than any other advancement / fad (depending on your opinion) than anything else before.

This also tracks with every app and website injecting AI into every one of your interactions, with no way to disable it.

I think the article's point about non-consent is a very apt one, and expresses why I dislike this trend so much. I left Google Workspace, as a paying customer for years, because they injected gemini into gmail etc and I couldn't turn it off (only those on the most expensive enterprise plans could at the time I left).

To be clear I am someone that uses AI basically every day, but the non-consent is still frustrating and dehumanising. Users–even paying users–are "considered" in design these days as much as a cow is "considered" in the design of a dairy farm.

I am moving all of the software that I pay for to competitors who either do not integrate AI, or allow me to disable it if I wish.

To add to this, it's the same attitude that they used to create the AI in the first place by using content which they don't own, without permission. Regardless of how useful it may be, the companies creating it and including it have demonstrated time and again that they do not care about consent.

> I left Google Workspace, as a paying customer for years, because they injected gemini into gmail

I wonder if this varies by territory. In UK, none of the Gmail accounts I use has received this pollution

> I am moving all of the software that I pay for to competitors who either do not integrate AI, or allow me to disable it if I wish.

The latter sounds safer. The former may add "AI" tomorrow.

> only those on the most expensive enterprise plans could at the time I left.

lol. so the premium feature is the ability to turn off the AI? That's one way to monetise AI I suppose.

Even WhatsApp has it in the search bar

>I disagree: in as much as I have noticed this far more with AI than any other advancement / fad

I agree with gp that new spam emails that override customers' email marketing preferences is not an "AI" issue.

The problem is that once companies have your email address, their irresistible compulsion to spam you is so great that they will deliberately not honor their own "Communication Preferences" that supposedly lets customers opt out of all marketing emails.

Even companies that are mostly good citizens about obeying customers' email marketing preferences still end up making exceptions. Examples:

Amazon has a profile page to opt out of all email marketing and it works... except ... it doesn't work to stop the new Amazon Pharmacy and Amazon Health marketing emails. Those emails do not have an "Unsubscribe" link and there is no extra setting in the customer profile to prevent them.

Apple doesn't send out marketing messages and obeys their customers' marketing email preferences ... except .. when you buy a new iPhone and then they send emails about "Your new iPhone lets you try Apple TV for 3 months free!" and then more emails about "You have Apple Music for 3 months free!"

Neither of those aggressive emails have anything to do with AI. Companies just like to make exceptions to their rules to spam you. The customer's email inbox is just too valuable a target for companies to ignore.

That said, I have 3 gmail.com addresses and none of them have marketing spam emails from Google about Gemini AI showing up in the Primary inbox. Maybe it's commendable that Google is showing incredible restraint so far. (Or promoting Gemini in Chrome and web apps is enough exposure for them.)

Imagine making this argument for other technologies. There is no opt-out button for machine learning, choosing the power source for their datacenters, the coding language in their software, etc. Conceptually there is a difference between opting out of an interaction with another party vs opting out of a specific part of their technology stack.