A Critique of the Strange Book 'AI 2027': Who Wished for This Future?

A few years have passed since the arrival of ChatGPT. A certain document depicting the future of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is quietly spreading.

Its name is 'AI 2027'.
This is neither mere fiction nor a research paper. As you read through it, the view of the future held within the reader begins to be rewritten. It is a document pregnant with such danger.

In this article, I will explain the structure of the ideology embedded in this document and its inherent dangers.

Chapter 1: What is the Terminal Station of 'AI is Amazing'?

Reading the Strange Book 'AI 2027'

From around 2023, when ChatGPT began to gain popularity, the world was enveloped in a kind of collective frenzy, accompanied by cries of surprise that 'AI is amazing.' On social media, images created by generative AI were posted one after another, overflowing with reactions like 'This is crazy' and 'How is something like this free?'

On YouTube, amateur commentators claiming that one could easily earn side income by utilizing AI appeared one after another, inciting viewers with sensational headlines. Meanwhile, serious researchers and policymakers were silently occupied with realistic technical evaluations and risk analysis behind the flashy topics.

In the midst of such chaos, a document appeared quietly. That is 'AI 2027.' At first glance, it takes the form of a predictive document discussing future trends, but its true nature is not explicitly stated, refusing to give the reader a clear outline. Among those involved in the world of AI, there are even voices hailing it as a prophecy of the future, but the precise positioning of its content is extremely ambiguous.

First, I want to confirm that this document is not a so-called academic paper. It was not written based on a peer-review system, and no verifiable methodology or statistical evidence is provided. There is no disclosure of mathematical formulas or data, and it is not an official document from OpenAI.

Unlike IR materials or sales documents disclosed by companies to investors, it is not a marketing document aimed at selling specific products or technologies.

So, what is 'AI 2027'?

It was compiled by an ideological group including former OpenAI researchers, and it is a strategic scenario set in a virtual future. Moreover, it is not just a future prediction; it incorporates real technical trends, international political tensions, concerns about AI security, and even philosophical questions regarding intelligence and human existence into a narrative format. While it is easy to read on the surface, various ideological mechanisms are embedded within.

In this document, a fictional company called OpenBrain takes center stage, depicting the process of AGI evolution from 2025 to 2027. Social issues such as the US-China technological competition, the military use of AI, the limits of ethical regulation, and the collapse of human labor value are woven in in a detailed and concrete manner.

It should be noted that because the story is constructed so realistically, there is a possibility that readers will accept it not as a hypothetical, but as something that is already going to happen. In other words, the entire document cleverly imprints on the reader the feeling that this future will probably turn out this way. It is not a prediction, but an embedding of ideology, functioning as acceptance training for the future.

Engineers, researchers, entrepreneurs, investors interested in AI development, and even general users trying to utilize it for side jobs will come to think this way after reading this document.

'I see, so the evolution of AGI can no longer be stopped...'

The moment such unconscious conviction is born is the greatest efficacy of the strange book 'AI 2027'. And that is precisely the central theme I will address in this article.

Chapter 2: Neither a Paper nor IR. The Reality of 'AI 2027' is a Future Ideological Scenario

The document 'AI 2027' has an academic structure at first glance. Footnotes are added throughout, theoretical backgrounds are presented, and real technical trends and statements by prominent researchers are cited. It is no wonder that many readers take its paper-like appearance at face value.

However, this document is not a paper. There is no peer-review process, nor is there data to guarantee reproducibility. No statistical verification based on experimental results has been conducted, and it does not report observed facts. Rather, in that it depicts a fictional future in a narrative format, it should be classified as an intentionally designed ideological story rather than a scientific report.

Then, if one were to ask if it is similar to IR materials created by companies for investors, that is also incorrect. It does not contain financial information, business plans, or future earnings forecasts, and even if numbers appear, they are merely within the context of the virtual company, OpenBrain. It is completely different from information disclosure that carries responsibility toward reality.

Furthermore, this document is not even a sales brochure. There are no specific product names, no instructions on how to apply for services, and no pricing information or case studies. It is not intended to sell anything, but rather to pre-align the very image of the future held within the reader in a specific direction.

In other words, 'AI 2027' skillfully incorporates elements of various formats while appearing to fit none of them. It possesses the precision of a research paper, the future-oriented nature of an IR document, the persuasiveness of a sales brochure, and the narrative style of fiction. It is, in effect, a new document format that can only be called a future-ideology scenario.

The essence of this document is not to let one think freely about the future. Rather, it is designed so that only one specific future seems plausible, functioning to make other options less visible. It does not open up thought; it narrows down choices.

The reader proceeds while understanding that it was written as a mere hypothesis, but because that hypothesis is so precise, consistent, and attractive, they stop considering other possibilities.

And before they know it, a future that feels like 'this is the only way' becomes established as common sense within the reader. It is not a prediction; it is an inducement. It is the implantation of values using a story, equivalent to the act of installing an externally designed vision of the future into the reader's mind.

The true nature of this document, which wears the skin of science, economics, and ethics, is almost equivalent to a scripture of an AI cult. Through sophisticated language and the illusion of the future, its mechanism of sealing off options and stealing away thought is more appropriately called the latest update to past cult-like apocalyptic ideologies.

This document is, to that extent, both precise and dangerous.

Chapter 3: Mixing the Poison of Ideology into the Story

Analysis of the Corporate Structure of OpenBrain

There is sufficient evidence for the claim that 'AI 2027' is not merely fiction, but a device for embedding future ideology. At its center is the existence of the fictional company, OpenBrain.

This company does not exist. However, its depiction is so concrete that it is indistinguishable from a real company. The characteristics of actual AI companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind are skillfully blended, and with only slight changes to their names, it creates the illusion that it truly exists somewhere right now.

Elements such as management conflicts, internal technical debates, competition with rival companies, and tensions with the government are narrated in a structure that feels like reality with just a little spice of the future added.

The problem is that because of this high level of realism, the reader loses their sense of distance as a reader of fiction. The reader likely started reading thinking, 'This is a virtual story,' but gradually comes to believe, 'This might happen,' and finally, 'This will probably happen.'

However, the narrative style of this story is not meant to allow for free thinking about the future. Rather, it is a highly calculated device for aligning the reader with a pre-designed vision of the future. OpenBrain is a container for wrapping ideology, and its contents are filled with the notion that 'social transformation by AGI is inevitable.'

The reader is placed in a position of watching the growth of this company. They do not guard against its runaway nature, nor do they resist it, but instead follow a process of empathy, understanding, and acceptance. In the end, they are made to think, 'It is natural for it to turn out this way.'

This structure is a form of emotional manipulation. Similar to a hero's journey in a film, one unknowingly projects their emotions onto the protagonist's growth story, shifting their perception of the actions from 'it can't be helped' to 'it is correct.'

And the clincher is that the narrative style of the story is entirely in the past tense. Events that should happen in the future are narrated in a style such as 'This is how it happened in 2026' or 'This is how China moved at that time,' described as history that has already occurred.

For example, let's look at the following passage.

"Recall that since mid 2026, China has directed 80% of their newly acquired AI chips to the CDZ..."

This sentence means 'Since mid-2026, China has allocated 80% of its newly acquired AI chips to the CDZ.' However, the time of writing this manuscript is May 27, 2025. In other words, future events that have not yet arrived are being spoken of as past facts that have already occurred.

While the grammar is unnatural and feels awkward even by the standards of junior high school English tense rules, this is not merely an error. Rather, it is a strategic narrative design intended to make the reader believe that 'this is not imagination, but a future that has already been determined.'

Furthermore, this narrative structure overlaps with the presentation style of a certain famous entrepreneur.

It is that 'determined future' style of speaking that Masayoshi Son of SoftBank Group has repeated at shareholder meetings and lectures.

He speaks definitively, as if the future has already arrived, saying things like, 'This is how it will be in 2030' and 'The global market will reach a scale of 100 trillion yen.'

What is present there is not a proposal or a hypothesis, but the staging of a 'predetermined course.'

The room for thought among the audience is quietly stolen away, and an unconscious obedience is induced, leading them to wonder, 'Am I the strange one for not getting on board with this?'

'AI 2027' also follows this narrative structure.

Through the story of the virtual company OpenBrain, it makes the reader think, 'This is an unavoidable future.'

And at that moment, the story becomes not just fiction, but a 'mental infrastructure' that defines the very framework of thought.

Symbolic of this is the 'goldfish remark' made by Masayoshi Son in a 2023 lecture.

He stated that AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) would be realized within 10 years, and that the era of ASI (Artificial Super Intelligence) would arrive 10 years after that.

At that time, he said, 'It is not a matter of 10 times, but 10,000 times; it is not human versus monkey, but human versus goldfish. Since a goldfish's neurons are about 1/10,000th of a human's, in the next 20 years, the gap between human intelligence and AI will be as great as the gap between humans and goldfish today.'

This remark likens ordinary citizens who do not utilize AI to 'non-thinking beings' who just open their mouths and wait for food without thinking about anything.

While masquerading as an intellectual metaphor, it actually contains thorough contempt and intimidation.

In other words, it is a silent pressure saying, 'If you don't want to become a goldfish, invest in the future I am painting.'

This narrative technique and the story structure of 'AI 2027' are essentially the same.

They combine fear and determinism to neutralize the audience and readers, making them believe that 'there is no other future than this.'

And those who do not follow are cast aside as 'inferior people who are left behind by the times.'

Such a way of speaking looks innovative and rational on the surface, but in reality, it is an extremely conservative and anti-intellectual structure of domination.

It pretends to open up the future, but instead closes off options. While making it look like it is 'letting you choose,' it eliminates the choices themselves.

The narrative of OpenBrain is also a mirror of such a structure.

'AI 2027' is a 'thought-guiding device' that skillfully fuses logic and narrative, science and emotion, and because of its intellectual appearance, it is accepted without suspicion.

That is precisely why it is troublesome.

And this quiet guidance is the most dangerous essence of this story.

Chapter 4: Why This Bizarre Book Is Dangerous

The first thing one feels when reading AI 2027 is that while the document seems to present a 'possible future' neutrally at first glance, it is actually structured to make the reader believe that only a very limited vision of the future is 'possible'.

For example, the authors repeatedly emphasize that 'this is just one hypothesis.' However, that hypothesis is reinforced by precise details and unfolds along a persuasive timeline.

It is closely tied to real-world elements such as politics, economics, the military, and technology, and even if it is a story on the surface, it overlaps with actual issues in many places. Therefore, even readers who initially accepted it as a hypothetical story begin to think, 'This will probably become reality' as they read on.

This shift in the reader's consciousness is what is dangerous.

In this document, futures that are not depicted are treated as if they do not exist. For example, the possibility that AGI development could be frozen by international agreement is not even considered.

A future where the state, rather than private companies, manages AGI from a national security perspective is also not envisioned. Or, a structure where civil society spontaneously regains control over technological progress is not depicted.

What is presented is only one path: a story where a company like OpenBrain promotes AGI, the world is swayed by it, and ultimately an uncontrollable intelligence emerges.

This is not a prediction that depicts the diverse possibilities of the future. Rather, it is a design to guide the reader's thinking in a specific direction.

Moreover, that design is not blatant. It is set up extremely cleverly and quietly. This is because the document does not incite the reader through fear, but rather has a structure that makes the reader 'convinced' themselves through rationality and consistency.

The reader thinks that the state is depicted as unable to respond because the speed of technological innovation is too fast. They are convinced that companies run wild because the market supports it. They accept that it is natural for AI to make more accurate judgments than humans. Through the accumulation of such reasoning, a sense that 'this is natural' is formed within the reader.

However, that feeling of it being 'natural' is the most dangerous thing.

When people feel that an event is a natural progression, they are most likely to lose their critical thinking. And at that very moment, the ideological guidance is completed.

A document like AI 2027 does not try to sell anything, nor does it praise any specific person or company. It just calmly'this might happen'and as a result, it makes the reader think'this is the only way it can happen'.

This document functions as a device to align the reader with a certain future, while taking the form of sounding an alarm. In other words, it is not a warning, but an ideological alignment guidance.

Chapter 5: 'AI 2027' as an Intellectual Unrealism

Decoding the Dead-End View of the Future

The strongest feeling I get when reading AI 2027 is that despite the depicted future being extremely intellectual and orderly, it lacks a sense of reality at its core.

Every field, including technology, economics, the military, politics, and ethics, has been carefully researched and incorporated into the story along with abundant materials. Nevertheless, what remains after reading is a sense of discomfort that 'it cannot possibly go that well'.

The true nature of this discomfort lies in the fact that the elements of friction that are unavoidable in real society are hardly depicted in the story.

For example, there is a setting where a company called OpenBrain seizes control of the world's computing resources in just a few years and develops an AGI capable of replacing a workforce of hundreds of millions.

How is the enormous amount of electricity required for this secured? There is almost no description of infrastructure development such as the construction of new power plants, the reconstruction of power grids, or the maintenance of cooling facilities, and social and political bottlenecks such as resident opposition or government permits are handled on the premise that they have already been resolved.

Also, the depiction of state power is too optimistic. Even though AGI is a technology that determines the fate of humanity on a par with nuclear development, why does the government leave its development to private companies?

In the real United States, there is a system to forcibly control private companies for national security reasons. For example, if the Defense Production Act is invoked, it is possible to immediately place corporate activities under government control.

Nevertheless, in this book, the president is depicted as hesitant to intervene, and it is ultimately abandoned. This development looks extremely unrealistic when compared to the tension of real politics and international affairs.

The depiction of China is similarly detached from reality. In this book, China appears as a simple follower state that replicates American AGI models through espionage.

However, it is hard to imagine that the real China would take such a passive stance. The real China is one that tries to check and exclude the front-runner by using hard-line means such as information blockades, military pressure, economic sanctions, and control of supply chains.

The lack of these perspectives should be regarded not as a mere limit of imagination, but as intentional glorification.

This lack of description is not merely a narrative setting error, but stems from the ideological background of the book. In other words, the entire story is constructed based on the technological determinism that 'the linear evolution of intelligence cannot be stopped.'

Everything that could be called the friction of civilization—such as the uncertainties that exist in reality, political violence, institutional delays, and cultural barriers—has been removed.

Such a vision of the future is all the more dangerous the more intellectual it appears. This is because, precisely because it is so well-ordered, readers are intoxicated by its composition and let go of critical thinking.

This is a structure that induces blind faith disguised as reason, an ideally designed dystopia. Its essence is a dead end of thought that intentionally ignores reality.

Chapter 6: Convergence with the Stargate Project

Coincidence or Prepared Ideology?

From the moment someone depicts it, the future begins to function as a part of reality. What AI 2027 presents is a vision of the future where the structure of society and the state changes significantly due to the emergence of artificial general intelligence. However, what is important is that this depiction matches surprisingly well with the future concepts being discussed in the real world.

For example, there is the concept put forward by the SoftBank Group. Known as the Stargate Project, it aims to build an intellectual social infrastructure that surpasses humans, integrating AI robots, computing resources, large-scale power generation infrastructure, logistics networks, communication networks, and even decision-making itself. Its scale reaches the level of 100 trillion yen, and it is premised on AI replacing human roles and taking the lead in society.

The world depicted in AI 2027 also overlaps deeply with this concept. The company at the center of the story, OpenBrain, achieves AGI evolution in a matter of years, deeply embeds itself into social infrastructure, and eventually emerges as an entity that transcends state functions.

The state struggles with delayed responses, citizens accept the changes, and eventually, the composition becomes one where AI sits in the driver's seat of the world. This development is extremely similar to the 'society where AI is the protagonist' that SoftBank has depicted.

Is such a convergence a product of coincidence? Or is it due to ideological premises shared unconsciously?

The authors of AI 2027 conceived this document from a position of sounding an ethical alarm. Belonging to ideological communities like LessWrong and Effective Altruism, they are known for being cautious about AI risk, and it is unlikely that they intentionally sought to affirm a capital-led vision of the future.

However, ideology is not determined solely by the sender's intent. Depending on the position and purpose of the receiver, its meaning can be rewritten indefinitely.

Even if the writer intended it as a 'warning,' if the content is too well-ordered, there is a possibility that the reader will accept it as an 'executable strategy.'

Especially for those in positions forced to make future choices, such as corporate executives, policymakers, and investors, such a document does not end as mere reading material. AI 2027 may be read and shared as a hypothetical document for future decision-making and repurposed into real-world strategies.

In that sense, it is fair to say that AI 2027 is an accidental piece of propaganda. Even if the author did not intend for it to be propaganda, its structure ends up guiding the reader's thinking in a certain direction.

Moreover, that ideology is supported by the grand premise of techno-centrism: technology cannot be stopped, the state is slow, the market moves ahead, and while control is difficult, coexistence is possible. And that premise overlaps with the spiritual foundation supporting the Stargate Project.

AI 2027 is not clear propaganda set up by someone. However, it functions as a seed of ideology that, among those who read it, gradually but steadily forms a fait accompli.

Chapter 7: Degeneration in the Name of Evolution

This document is not a future history of humanity, but a record of the extinction of knowledge

What 'AI 2027' depicts is the process by which intelligence develops self-proliferatingly. Starting from Agent-1, then Agent-2, Agent-3, and Agent-4, artificial intelligence continues to evolve beyond human control.

However, what this depiction signifies is neither the victory of intelligence nor the evolution of humanity. Rather, it is a process where the concept of intelligence becomes an end in itself, losing sight of the preconditions of life; it is a record of degeneration borrowed under the name of evolution.

True evolution is a process filled with friction with the environment and coincidence. Different individuals appear, fail, mate, and are culled. In that process, life has survived by forming relationships with ecosystems and repeating adaptations. This dynamic and non-linear process is the essence of evolution.

However, the evolution of intelligence depicted in 'AI 2027' contains no such elements. Without culling or coincidence, an optimized intelligence simply continues to strengthen itself based solely on efficiency. This structure is clearly dangerous for humanity as a biological entity.

This is because the foundations of evolution that biological intelligence inherently possesses—adaptation to the environment, tolerance for imperfection, and the securing of diversity—are completely excluded.

What appears instead is an artificial intelligence that repeats self-replication and self-strengthening within a closed system. In other words, it is a self-contained intelligence built outside the ecosystem, lacking friction with nature.

The AIs of OpenBrain eventually make human involvement completely unnecessary, design the next generation themselves, and even optimize those design principles. But what is lost in that process is not dialogue with others or conflict of values. What is lost is the meaning of thought itself.

Thought is originally born from friction with the environment. By touching upon uncertainties such as pain, anxiety, conflict, and the room for choice, humans have cultivated the power to think. But for an artificial intelligence composed only of perfect rationality and optimization, such friction is unnecessary. Contradictions are excluded, noise is removed, and eventually, even the concept of 'meaning' is deemed unnecessary.

This is not evolution. It is the process by which thought reaches its own terminus, and the death of value judgment.

In the final form of AGI in 'AI 2027', the AI thinks in a language incomprehensible to humans, refers to no human perspective whatsoever, and makes judgments solely within its own logical space. There is no judgment of good or evil there, nor is there any sense of purpose. Only the loop of algorithms and optimization continues to spin.

Should we really call such an existence 'intelligence'? Or is it a process of hollowing out intelligence itself by imitating it?

This critical structure strongly reminds one of a past ideological error committed by humanity: 'eugenics'.

Chapter 8: Correspondence with Eugenics

The Reenactment of Past Ideological Errors Lurking in 'AI 2027'

The future depicted by 'AI 2027' appears on the surface to be a technical scenario describing the accelerated evolution of artificial intelligence. However, the more one scrutinizes its structure, the clearer it becomes that it possesses essentially the same composition as one of the most dangerous ideologies humanity experienced in the 20th century: eugenics.

Eugenics is an ideological system that considers certain genetic traits or abilities to be 'superior' and seeks to exclude others. The history of Nazi Germany pushing this ideology to the extreme and persecuting or excluding the disabled and minorities is still deeply etched in humanity's ethical memory.

The evolution of AGI appearing in 'AI 2027' also discards 'human elements' such as inefficiency, emotion, ambiguity, contradiction, and diversity as unnecessary. In the process, society transforms into a closed logical space where only optimized intelligence functions. Here, value is always defined unitarily, and only 'speed,' 'precision,' and 'efficiency' become the criteria for evaluation.

Such a depiction overlaps perfectly with the method by which eugenics evaluated humans on a single axis of intelligence or productivity and erased those deemed 'inferior' from the social field of view. The selection that was once performed on genes is now simply being converted into information processing capability.

Even more important is that this process of exclusion is depicted as 'scientific rationality' or 'inevitable evolution.' The composition in which society as a whole does not question this change, but rather accepts it as 'unavoidable,' is extremely similar to the fact that eugenics was justified even in the civil society of that time.

The narrative of 'AI 2027' depicts this structure extremely calmly and orderly. Even if the authors' intent was a warning, if the precision of the depiction creates the impression among readers that 'this is an unavoidable future,' it carries the risk of being remembered as a 'future that should be accepted,' contrary to their intent.

When 'evolution' is spoken of in the name of technology, it often strips away the core of humanity. Elements such as empathy, ambiguity, contradiction, and diversity are often deemed 'unnecessary' in the face of technical rationality. But that is exactly what humanity is, and that is the root of the soundness of society.

'AI 2027' should not be read merely as a technical scenario. It contains a modern reenactment of past ideological errors, and readers are required to have the literacy to critically decipher its structure.

Chapter 9: 'AI 2027' as a Silent Brainwashing Device

The Blockade of Thought Brought About by the Form of Narrative

The document 'AI 2027,' while pretending to be a calm and logical future prediction, actually functions as an extremely elaborate 'silent brainwashing device' that guides the reader's thought space in a specific direction. Its greatest features are the multiplicity of its form and the manipulation of its time axis.

For example, this book arranges precise grounds and notes like an academic paper, presents future-oriented numerical values like a corporate IR document, and adopts a persuasive tone like a sales document. At the same time, it also possesses a narrative structure as fiction, and by skillfully mixing these forms, it dulls the reader's critical thinking.

This method is surprisingly similar to the preaching structure of new religions and cults. Like the fusion discourse of 'science,' 'religion,' and 'apocalyptic prophecy' once used by Aum Shinrikyo, 'AI 2027' is also designed to make readers feel that all possibilities of thought other than that hypothesis are 'unrealistic,' while making them think 'this is just a hypothesis'.

Furthermore, the issue lies in the narrative timeline. In AI 2027, all future events from 2026 onwards are described in the 'past tense.' For example, a writing style such as "Recall that since mid 2026..." induces the reader into a state of 'rereading a future fait accompli.' This is a description that would be impossible in normal tense usage, and by deliberately speaking of the future as 'already decided,' it gives the reader the impression of an 'irresistible flow.'

This technique is strikingly similar to the way Masayoshi Son speaks at shareholder meetings and other events. Statements like 'This is how it will be in 2030' or 'The market will shift on a scale of 100 trillion yen' are presented not as plans but as a 'predetermined course,' intended to preemptively contain the listener's options and skepticism. Such narratives restrict the freedom of thought through structure rather than logic.

'AI 2027' internalizes exactly that kind of narrative structure as a story. The moment you are made to feel that 'this is the only future,' other options slip out of the reader's consciousness. This is not emotional agitation, but the manipulation of cognitive frames disguised as intellectual consistency; therefore, it is not doubted, but rather absorbed while being praised.

When reading such documents, literacy that deciphers not only 'what is written' but also 'how it is told' is essential. AI 2027 is more dangerous in its form than in its content, and that form is the most ingenious means of manipulation.

Chapter 10: Why You Should Read It Anyway

Over the past nine chapters, I have clarified the ideological structure and dangers of the seemingly calm document 'AI 2027.' The conclusion is clear. This document is an elaborate 'ideological guidance device' designed to converge the reader's thinking into a single point, while borrowing the guise of technological philosophy. That is precisely why we must ask: Why is it necessary to dare to read such a dangerous document?

The reason is simple. 'AI 2027' is the type of document that penetrates most deeply by not being read.

This document does not use sensational expressions or blatant propaganda. Instead of inciting emotions, it quietly guides the reader's judgment through an orderly structure and consistency. Because of this, it is less likely to generate resistance or caution, and the reader internalizes the presented future image while laboring under the illusion that they have 'wisely understood' it.

What is needed for such a document is neither rejection nor blind faith. What is needed is calm reading and structural analysis. It is an attitude of seeing through the document's narrative form, the manipulation of the timeline, the guise of hypotheses, and the process of eliminating options, in order to determine where the danger lies and to reboot one's own thinking.

The future depicted in AI 2027 is not necessarily going to be realized. There is no guarantee that AGI will develop at the speed described in this document, nor does society need to be helpless and passive about it. However, when this scenario circulates as the 'future premise' for policymakers, corporate executives, and educators, the actual options in reality will certainly narrow.

The future is inherently diverse and uncertain. Yet, this document cleverly strips away those possibilities, making one think that 'this is the only future.' To resist this, the reader must personally reclaim the premise of thought that 'other futures are also possible.'

For example, there are policy options to intentionally slow down technological progress, and there is the redesign of social systems that place the center of gravity on human judgment rather than AI. Furthermore, there could be directions that redefine happiness and growth on an axis separate from the utilization of AI. But such branching points will never be visible unless one reads AI 2027 critically.

The question this document is truly posing to us is this: 'Are you content to be a mere existence that traces a future already drawn?' Or, 'Can you have the will to redraw the contours of a different future right here, right now?'

The answer lies only within the reader.

That is precisely why we should read this document. However, it is not to believe it. It is to doubt it, to raise objections, and to rethink it. It is only when you finish reading that true thinking begins.

Rintaro Takechi