Such stances are very easy to make when there is no financial incentive or no competition with any meaningful money on the line. But as soon as there is competition, they don't care about "AI policies" if it is the means to make a lot of money.

The best example of this is security in open source software which maintainers have no choice but to use AI to protect themselves before an attacker can use AI to find and build exploits for security vulnerabilities faster than they can patch it.

In some sectors such as banking, crypto, defense and government, this is extremely critical. It will soon be the same with AI companies who have the AI model and someone could use AI to breach them with the goal of leaking the proprietary model.

So to them, policies like this, are actually a downgrade that they cannot afford to do.

▲

_dwt 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm sorry, but what on earth are you talking about? This guy appears to be a web designer. You think there's no competition in that space and no incentive to churn things out fast with AI? Agree or disagree but if he's honest his money is very much where his mouth is.

▲

rvz 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> I'm sorry, but what on earth are you talking about? This guy appears to be a web designer.

The criticality of a web designer is quite vanishingly low with not that much money on the line. That's why his former customers are going for a $20 Lovable subscription instead of his web designer services.

It is fair to say he has been disrupted.

> You think there's no competition in that space and no incentive to churn things out fast with AI?

There is little to no money in being a human web designer (without AI) in 2026. He is taking a stance in never using AI which he is being out-competed by ultra-low cost AI subscriptions like Lovable, Bolt.new, and the others.

He has no choice but to adapt.

▲

_dwt 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I… yes. That’s a reasonable interpretation of the current state of the world even if I reject the “no choice” framing. But you’re the one calling his stance “easy”?

	▲	rvz 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> But you’re the one calling his stance “easy”? The problem is that it is the market that believes it is now "easy" and it does not care about these policies. Unless the author believes he can compete for customers without using AI against the AI subscription services for 1/100th of the price per month of a human web designer.