Redazione RHC : 8 August 2025 10:26
In recent months, the debate over artificial intelligence has taken on increasingly extreme tones.
On the one hand, large companies developing and selling AI solutions are pushing apocalyptic narratives, warning that those who don’t embrace this technology risk being excluded from the market, or even succumbing. On the other hand, surveys are emerging that tell a very different story: public and many business trust in AI is decreasing, in some cases at a worrying rate. In the United States, this phenomenon is already seen as a potential national security issue, as skewed or slow adoption could cause the company to lose ground in the global race for technological supremacy.
The words of Alon Haimovich, CEO of Microsoft Israel, fit perfectly into this heated context. Interviewed by Calcalist, he declared that “the model according to which business success equals many employees is over” and that every worker is now expected to know how to use an AI agent. A statement that goes beyond pure technological observation: it is a clear stance on a future in which AI will not be optional, but a fundamental skill for professional survival.
Haimovich does not spare criticism even of national strategies. According to him, the Nagel Committee’s recommendation to invest 18 billion shekels in the development of an Israeli artificial intelligence model will not really change the balance of power. The implicit message is clear: competitive advantage is not just about the amount of funds invested, but about the ability to integrate AI into every operational aspect, from individual employees to the highest decision-making structures.
Yet, while big tech executives and figures like Haimovich call for rapid and widespread adoption of AI, disillusionment is growing. Some sectors are denouncing excessive, artificially fueled hype and fearing that the “everything will be automated” narrative is more about driving sales and subscriptions than reflecting reality. Others warn that the continued pressure to “keep up” could lead to hasty decisions, with unforeseen economic and social consequences.
In the United States, declining trust in AI is becoming a strategic issue. If citizens and businesses perceive the technology as unreliable or risky, it will be more difficult to implement in critical sectors. The risk, according to some analysts, is that international competitors—less restrained by ethical or regulatory concerns, like China—could surpass Washington in strategic applications, from defense to the economy. This creates a paradox: while the private sector pushes for rapid adoption, the state also finds itself having to manage popular distrust.
At the same time, some argue that the time for “wild construction” of AI is already over.
After the initial rush, characterized by incessant launches and grandiose promises, we are entering a “reconstruction” phase, where companies will seek to correct the damage and distortions caused by hasty adoption. This could mean investing in more transparent systems, less opaque models, and a greater focus on the social sustainability of AI.
The truth, perhaps, lies somewhere in the middle. It’s hard to deny that AI will be a decisive lever for productivity and competitiveness, but at the same time it would be naive to ignore the risks of excessive rhetoric. While “technological terror” can accelerate change, it also risks alienating workers, citizens, and entire sectors, slowing down the very progress it seeks to drive.
In the coming years, we can expect a more complex playing field. Companies will have to balance speed of adoption and transparency, governments will have to ensure national security without stifling innovation, and citizens will have to develop critical thinking skills that allow them to distinguish between real opportunities and aggressive marketing.
Those who manage to navigate this balance, using AI as a tool and not a fetish, will be ready for the new paradigm outlined by Haimovich. The others risk discovering too late that the real revolution is not AI itself, but the ability to use it consciously.
Redazione