What do you think?
The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State
It presented itself as a form of futurism. But the future envisioned by the architects of the Artificial State looked, chillingly, like the very worst of the past…
We live in the age of data. Over the past century, rapidly evolving technologies have transformed every aspect of our society, in troubling and seemingly unstoppable ways. Political campaigns have been reduced to attention-mining algorithms, multinational corporations control public discourse, and the era of the liberal nation-state seems to be coming to an end, replaced by the rule of artificial intelligence. Today, power is maintained through mystification: machines, we are told, know what humans cannot. Yet nothing about any of this was, or is, inevitable.
In this astounding account of how technology has corroded democracy around the world, prizewinning historian Jill Lepore traces the rise and fall of what she calls the ‘Artificial State’. Examining everything from robot rights and Elon Musk’s origins to what data centres cost wildlife, Lepore offers a history – and a perspective – wholly missing from the debate.
History, Lepore demonstrates, is driven not by machines but by individuals, societies, cultures and ideas. The architects of the Artificial State had no theory of governance, nor did they have any interest in the rule of law, or any capacity for restraint. They drew their ideas not from science, but from science fiction. Yet everything destructive that they have done can be undone. By illuminating the origins of the Artificial State, Lepore reveals how we can escape it – helping us to imagine, and fight for, a different future.
We live in the age of data. Over the past century, rapidly evolving technologies have transformed every aspect of our society, in troubling and seemingly unstoppable ways. Political campaigns have been reduced to attention-mining algorithms, multinational corporations control public discourse, and the era of the liberal nation-state seems to be coming to an end, replaced by the rule of artificial intelligence. Today, power is maintained through mystification: machines, we are told, know what humans cannot. Yet nothing about any of this was, or is, inevitable.
In this astounding account of how technology has corroded democracy around the world, prizewinning historian Jill Lepore traces the rise and fall of what she calls the ‘Artificial State’. Examining everything from robot rights and Elon Musk’s origins to what data centres cost wildlife, Lepore offers a history – and a perspective – wholly missing from the debate.
History, Lepore demonstrates, is driven not by machines but by individuals, societies, cultures and ideas. The architects of the Artificial State had no theory of governance, nor did they have any interest in the rule of law, or any capacity for restraint. They drew their ideas not from science, but from science fiction. Yet everything destructive that they have done can be undone. By illuminating the origins of the Artificial State, Lepore reveals how we can escape it – helping us to imagine, and fight for, a different future.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published August 25, 2026
About the author
Jill Lepore
42 books1,735 followersJill Lepore is the David Woods Kemper ’41 Professor of American History, Harvard College Professor, and chair of Harvard's History and Literature Program. She is also a staff writer at The New Yorker.
Winner of the Anisfield-Wolf Award for the best non-fiction book on race, and a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize; The Name of War (Knopf, 1998), winner of the Bancroft Prize, the Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize, and the Berkshire Prize and a finalist for the J. Anthony Lukas Award.
A co-founder of the magazine Common-place, Lepore’s essays and reviews have also appeared in the New York Times, the Times Literary Supplement, American Scholar, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, The Daily Beast, the Journal of American History and American Quarterly. Her research has been funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Pew Foundation, the Gilder Lehrman Institute, the Charles Warren Center, and the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. She has served as a consultant for the National Park Service and currently serves on the boards of the National Portrait Gallery and the Society of American Historians.
Jill lives in Cambridge,Massachusetts.
Winner of the Anisfield-Wolf Award for the best non-fiction book on race, and a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize; The Name of War (Knopf, 1998), winner of the Bancroft Prize, the Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize, and the Berkshire Prize and a finalist for the J. Anthony Lukas Award.
A co-founder of the magazine Common-place, Lepore’s essays and reviews have also appeared in the New York Times, the Times Literary Supplement, American Scholar, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, The Daily Beast, the Journal of American History and American Quarterly. Her research has been funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Pew Foundation, the Gilder Lehrman Institute, the Charles Warren Center, and the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. She has served as a consultant for the National Park Service and currently serves on the boards of the National Portrait Gallery and the Society of American Historians.
Jill lives in Cambridge,Massachusetts.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 175 reviews
Review of advance copy received from Edelweiss+
Jill Lepore's most recent books — on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution — have considered American history with an eye toward exploring how well we have lived up to the letter and the spirit of our founding documents. Her conclusion: We’ve done some things well and some things poorly or not at all. Now, however, we seem to have found ourselves on a downward slope when it comes to protecting the rights and wellbeing of our citizens. Many things have contributed to the corrosion of our liberal democracy — money, polarization, political calcification, wealth inequality, intransigence — but it’s become clear that technology is amplifying and accelerating the decline. And we -- as citizens, as humans -- have no control over development or implementation. This is the subject of her alarming new book.
Inspired by Hanna Arendt’s prescient writings about totalitarianism and automation, Lepore describes her task here as “an inquiry into what humans mean and intend in abandoning constitutional democracy, the liberal nation-state, and even humanity itself for rule by automation, government by machine, and replacement by artificial intelligence.”
The idea of liberal democracy government given us by the Age of Enlightenment and the Founders is one in which the people actively deliberate and interact in order to create a system that will “promote the safety and happiness of the people.” In other words, government by consent of the governed. It is not in itself a natural phenomenon, of course, but rather an artifice, made, monitored, and modified by humans.
The “artificial state,” on the other hand, is shaped not by humans but by data and algorithms and a vast concentration of wealth and power. It is “not something made by man but something nonhuman, something beyond human, something inhuman: the rule of humans by machines manufactured by corporations.”
This is a change of unprecedented magnitude and an existential threat to democracy. A small group of incredibly wealthy men (yes, they're all men) are shaping policy at the highest levels and designing and implementing technologies that will have enormous and possibly dangerous impacts on our lives. Think of it this way: no one is being asked to vote on or give consent to “government without consent, even government without humans.” Or to ubiquitous surveillance, AI-driven autonomous weaponry, AI anything, in fact, or a thousand other things that are happening all around us. Or to a handful of very wealthy tech leaders with enormous influence deciding our future, perhaps even our survival.
Lepore traces the roots of the Artificial State back to the Great Depression and the formation by a man named Howard Scott of an organization he called Technocracy, Inc. The profoundly undemocratic premise of the organization was that “only scientists and engineers have the intelligence and education to understand the industrial operations that lie at the heart of twentieth-century life.” (“Popular voting can be largely dispensed with,” they said, because “it is stupid.”)
Technocracy Inc eventually imploded but Scott’s vision was taken up by a man named Joshua Haldeman, who “led mass demonstrations [in New York City] of Technocrats at a time when they wore identical gray suits and drove identical gray cars in what was known as the Gray Fleet.” In time, Haldeman left the United States and his name receded from memory.
The Technocracy movement is gone today but, as Lepore demonstrates, its spirit has been resurrected in a new generation of powerful individuals such as Peter Thiel (PayPal, Palentir), Mark Zuckerberg (“There is no precedent for his ability to monitor, organize and even censor the conversations of two billion people.”), and numerous other self-proclaimed visionaries, including Joshua Haldeman’s grandson, Elon Musk.
Lepore’s book traces how the Artificial State has expanded since the ‘30s: the vast collection of data, data manipulation, concentration of power, AI, bots (there are more bots online than real people), deepfakes, monetized extremism, “government by trolling,” the loss of privacy (“By the 2010s it was nearly impossible to participate in any political behavior without supplying one’s data to the very corporations that were undermining democracy”), and more.
She describes where we are heading — where we have found ourselves — this way: Within the Artificial State, nearly every element of public and democratic life—civil society, representative government, an informed citizenry, equality of rights, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and faith in elections—is vulnerable to subversion through the reduction of politics to the digital manipulation of attention-mining algorithms, the trussing of government by corporate-owned digital architecture, the diminishment of citizenship to minutely message-tested online engagement.
It’s a dark picture. In 2023, some 350 scientists and industry leaders signed a single-sentence statement that acknowledged the danger facing us: “Mitigating the risk of extinction from A.I. should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks, such as pandemics and nuclear war.” (Earlier this month -- August 2026 -- more than 1300 experts and technicians published an open letter calling for regulation of AI research.)
Acknowledging an existential threat to human life is one thing; acting on it is something else entirely. “Why build something that you expect will destroy the human race?” Lepore asks. “One answer has to do with the nature of modern capitalism.” Tech firms are investing in or assisting authoritarian states around the world, knowing full well the technology will be used to oppress or even harm their citizens. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei acknowledged the problem in a leaked internal memo. The technology Anthropic was selling would “enrich dictators,” but — he added — “Unfortunately, I think ‘no bad person should ever benefit from our success’ is a pretty difficult principle to run a business on.” (I suppose another way of saying this would be, There's no profit to be made in acting morally so why bother?)
“The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State” sounds a dire, Orwellian warning. Lepore frames the question starkly: “Are humans to abandon government by consent for government by machine?” From where I sit, it’s hard to see how they/we do otherwise. There seems to be little appetite in Washington, DC, and other world capitals for slowing the technology down or regulating AI. There’s too much money being made, and the technology is hard — or impossible — for ordinary people and government officials to understand well enough to regulate (if they even wanted to: in 2025 the Trump White House issued an Executive Order titled “Preventing Woke AI in Federal Government,” whatever that means, if it means anything at all). And yet more and more functions within government (think DOGE) and industry are being transferred from humans to AI-enabled machines.
Lepore contends that the Artificial State is not inevitable. “The Artificial State is a fantasy half built, dreaded, adored, awaited. I also believe it to be doomed.” I wish I shared her confidence.
“Rise and Fall” is based on a series of lectures Lepore has given at Yale and elsewhere and an article she wrote for the New Yorker. Regrettably, the seams show from time to time, leaving the book less smooth and closely argued than others she’s written.
That said, her message is powerful and necessary. On a personal note, I was pleased to see moments where her deep emotional involvement in the subject came through, as in this lovely disclaimer: “A robot did not write this book. I wrote most of this book in the woods, sheltered by trees and serenaded by birdsong, in the company of dogs, cats, sheep, chickens, ducks, and one very old and rickety dying goat, and not far from bears and porcupines, owls and coyotes.”
My thanks to Liveright Publishers and Edelweis+ for providing a digital ARC in return for an honest review.
Inspired by Hanna Arendt’s prescient writings about totalitarianism and automation, Lepore describes her task here as “an inquiry into what humans mean and intend in abandoning constitutional democracy, the liberal nation-state, and even humanity itself for rule by automation, government by machine, and replacement by artificial intelligence.”
The idea of liberal democracy government given us by the Age of Enlightenment and the Founders is one in which the people actively deliberate and interact in order to create a system that will “promote the safety and happiness of the people.” In other words, government by consent of the governed. It is not in itself a natural phenomenon, of course, but rather an artifice, made, monitored, and modified by humans.
The “artificial state,” on the other hand, is shaped not by humans but by data and algorithms and a vast concentration of wealth and power. It is “not something made by man but something nonhuman, something beyond human, something inhuman: the rule of humans by machines manufactured by corporations.”
This is a change of unprecedented magnitude and an existential threat to democracy. A small group of incredibly wealthy men (yes, they're all men) are shaping policy at the highest levels and designing and implementing technologies that will have enormous and possibly dangerous impacts on our lives. Think of it this way: no one is being asked to vote on or give consent to “government without consent, even government without humans.” Or to ubiquitous surveillance, AI-driven autonomous weaponry, AI anything, in fact, or a thousand other things that are happening all around us. Or to a handful of very wealthy tech leaders with enormous influence deciding our future, perhaps even our survival.
Lepore traces the roots of the Artificial State back to the Great Depression and the formation by a man named Howard Scott of an organization he called Technocracy, Inc. The profoundly undemocratic premise of the organization was that “only scientists and engineers have the intelligence and education to understand the industrial operations that lie at the heart of twentieth-century life.” (“Popular voting can be largely dispensed with,” they said, because “it is stupid.”)
Technocracy Inc eventually imploded but Scott’s vision was taken up by a man named Joshua Haldeman, who “led mass demonstrations [in New York City] of Technocrats at a time when they wore identical gray suits and drove identical gray cars in what was known as the Gray Fleet.” In time, Haldeman left the United States and his name receded from memory.
The Technocracy movement is gone today but, as Lepore demonstrates, its spirit has been resurrected in a new generation of powerful individuals such as Peter Thiel (PayPal, Palentir), Mark Zuckerberg (“There is no precedent for his ability to monitor, organize and even censor the conversations of two billion people.”), and numerous other self-proclaimed visionaries, including Joshua Haldeman’s grandson, Elon Musk.
Lepore’s book traces how the Artificial State has expanded since the ‘30s: the vast collection of data, data manipulation, concentration of power, AI, bots (there are more bots online than real people), deepfakes, monetized extremism, “government by trolling,” the loss of privacy (“By the 2010s it was nearly impossible to participate in any political behavior without supplying one’s data to the very corporations that were undermining democracy”), and more.
She describes where we are heading — where we have found ourselves — this way: Within the Artificial State, nearly every element of public and democratic life—civil society, representative government, an informed citizenry, equality of rights, freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and faith in elections—is vulnerable to subversion through the reduction of politics to the digital manipulation of attention-mining algorithms, the trussing of government by corporate-owned digital architecture, the diminishment of citizenship to minutely message-tested online engagement.
It’s a dark picture. In 2023, some 350 scientists and industry leaders signed a single-sentence statement that acknowledged the danger facing us: “Mitigating the risk of extinction from A.I. should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks, such as pandemics and nuclear war.” (Earlier this month -- August 2026 -- more than 1300 experts and technicians published an open letter calling for regulation of AI research.)
Acknowledging an existential threat to human life is one thing; acting on it is something else entirely. “Why build something that you expect will destroy the human race?” Lepore asks. “One answer has to do with the nature of modern capitalism.” Tech firms are investing in or assisting authoritarian states around the world, knowing full well the technology will be used to oppress or even harm their citizens. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei acknowledged the problem in a leaked internal memo. The technology Anthropic was selling would “enrich dictators,” but — he added — “Unfortunately, I think ‘no bad person should ever benefit from our success’ is a pretty difficult principle to run a business on.” (I suppose another way of saying this would be, There's no profit to be made in acting morally so why bother?)
“The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State” sounds a dire, Orwellian warning. Lepore frames the question starkly: “Are humans to abandon government by consent for government by machine?” From where I sit, it’s hard to see how they/we do otherwise. There seems to be little appetite in Washington, DC, and other world capitals for slowing the technology down or regulating AI. There’s too much money being made, and the technology is hard — or impossible — for ordinary people and government officials to understand well enough to regulate (if they even wanted to: in 2025 the Trump White House issued an Executive Order titled “Preventing Woke AI in Federal Government,” whatever that means, if it means anything at all). And yet more and more functions within government (think DOGE) and industry are being transferred from humans to AI-enabled machines.
Lepore contends that the Artificial State is not inevitable. “The Artificial State is a fantasy half built, dreaded, adored, awaited. I also believe it to be doomed.” I wish I shared her confidence.
“Rise and Fall” is based on a series of lectures Lepore has given at Yale and elsewhere and an article she wrote for the New Yorker. Regrettably, the seams show from time to time, leaving the book less smooth and closely argued than others she’s written.
That said, her message is powerful and necessary. On a personal note, I was pleased to see moments where her deep emotional involvement in the subject came through, as in this lovely disclaimer: “A robot did not write this book. I wrote most of this book in the woods, sheltered by trees and serenaded by birdsong, in the company of dogs, cats, sheep, chickens, ducks, and one very old and rickety dying goat, and not far from bears and porcupines, owls and coyotes.”
My thanks to Liveright Publishers and Edelweis+ for providing a digital ARC in return for an honest review.
Review of advance copy received from NetGalley
I enjoyed listening to "The rise and fall of the Artifical state" as it goes trough the history of the technical and artifical progress that led here as well as discussing the downsides as well as whats going to be its downfall. Its both interesting and gives a lot to think about.
Got the audiobook for review
Got the audiobook for review
September 20, 2026
An important and worthwhile read, using an in-depth and thorough exe past to predict the future. It reads like a collection of lectures, which is to say it is easy to follow, it doesn’t rely on insider-jargon, and it is scattered with humor (necessarily dark, as it is in the face of a supreme existential dread). The overarching thesis, about the current Silicon Valley “merchant prince” obsession with replacing humanity with technological automation (disguised as innovation) is not exactly a unique claim. That, though, is her point. She refers to this book as an archaeology, and that is fitting. She traces human relationships to automation and technology throughout history, showing how again and again innovation is sold with incredible promises but almost always edges out human dignity, creativity, and autonomy instead of the simple conveniences that are promised. She uses pop-culture and fiction as a way of further exploring human anxieties about technology and automation, and then shows how contemporary tech-bro billionaires seem to take quite literally all the wrong messages from those stories. Capitalism, greed, lust for power and a fundamental insecurity all have a part to play in the contemporary Artificial State and its architects, along with the ideas of human dignity, respect for labor, the treatment of animals, and more, and Lepore traces the continuity of these ideas with a continuity of historical precedence in great detail with prose that is accessible and yet lets the ideas take deep root. Similar to many contemporary investigations into twenty-first century life and thought the book is not particularly hopeful. The epilogue does offer some passing swipe at optimism, a kind of “the future isn’t set in stone we can still change things” color of lipstick for this particular pig, but it doesn’t make me feel particularly cheerful or empowered. However, that is not the purpose of this book. The purpose of this book is to show patterns of human behavior and thought and to help us recognize historical analogues and precedent for our present moment, while then showing how the type, reach, and speed of contemporary technologies make this moment unique in history at the same time. Her research and arguments are thoughtful and detailed, her style is readable and accessible, and the book serves as a brilliant warning as a result.
July 1, 2026
“Building the Artificial State-finally building it, turning a science fiction dystopia into a fully functioning infrastructure—would indeed make Earth uninhabitable. This did not appear to concern the architects of the Artificial State. They had escape plans: Elon Musk to Mars, Mark Zuckerberg to the Metaverse, Peter Thiel to his land in New Zealand, Jeff Bezos to space, Sam Altman's brain uploaded to the cloud.They weren't saving humanity; they were preparing to abandon it.”
The world is being run by idiots and monsters.
Thanks to NetGalley for this ARC.
8/10
The world is being run by idiots and monsters.
Thanks to NetGalley for this ARC.
8/10
August 31, 2026
I’m a big Lepore fan, if she writes it, I read it. Seeing a Jill Lepore article in the New Yorker is exciting, an immediate bookmark or read it now moment. And now this as a micro follow-up to the majestic These Truths and We the People.
The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State felt like a synthesis of articles, podcasts, and her recent book (IF THEN) woven together with an uncertain and alarming central thesis about the state of AI, led by a 1970s generation of D&D players who turned into tech titan moguls.
If a read through of this all too short book feels slight on solutions, it’s because we’re all in a fairly disempowered state and all the regulatory power has been given to these insanely wealthy ‘geniuses.’ This should be one more call to do something; it’s a good thing we have the best minds in government to help us navigate the artificial terrain 🤔
The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State felt like a synthesis of articles, podcasts, and her recent book (IF THEN) woven together with an uncertain and alarming central thesis about the state of AI, led by a 1970s generation of D&D players who turned into tech titan moguls.
If a read through of this all too short book feels slight on solutions, it’s because we’re all in a fairly disempowered state and all the regulatory power has been given to these insanely wealthy ‘geniuses.’ This should be one more call to do something; it’s a good thing we have the best minds in government to help us navigate the artificial terrain 🤔
September 8, 2026
Sometimes I need to be reminded how much I love the way Jill Lepore’s mind works. After recently reading her essay from the August 10 New Yorker, Are You Human, about humankind’s plight in creating machines that now force us to prove to the machines that we are human, I eagerly grabbed her latest offering, The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State to revel in her further unraveling this fabulous nightmare. And indeed, her most recent work plays off the essay as well as her 2023 book, If Then: How the Simulmatics Corporation Invented the Future.
Ms. Lepore is the rare academic who writes clearly enough to garner a mainstream audience. Her prose is beautifully tangential, but always apropos. And this is what makes it inimitable, as compared to that of the mediocre academic who parrots this and that source, only to break a tiny bit of new ground to procure a PhD. The prose of the mediocre academic is generic enough to be low hanging fruit for AI imitation. “Chat GPT, cite sources A-Z on X, and then give it an interesting twist!” Lepore’s prose, on the contrary, is unique and immediately identifiable. She rambles to and fro and, just as the reader might get frustrated, ties all the ideas together into a coherent whole, in this case, painting a vast story of how humans created machines, inevitably leading to dehumanization, which is followed by sagacious humans predicting how awful their creation will be, beginning with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and culminating with works in the newly created Science Fiction genre which predicts our sorry plight today. And the irony is that the tech masters, i.e. the Overlords, like Musk, Alman, and Andreesen were enthralled and influenced by these seminal Sci Fi works without realizing that they were a warning and not a “How To” manual. It leaves the reader feeling awful and in despair.
Like most books that clarify and explain a dire issue facing humanity, e.g. global warming and surveillance capitalism, the pessimism outweighs the optimism. Ms. Lepore tells us, in the early chapters that she thinks the AI revolution is doomed and that she will elaborate why in the final chapter. I was disappointed to discover how brief and full of false hope the final chapter is, especially in light of the extensive damage to our planet that Ms. Lepore chronicles. I would like to think that the Pollyanna belief she espouses will prevail, but have my doubts.
Ms. Lepore is the rare academic who writes clearly enough to garner a mainstream audience. Her prose is beautifully tangential, but always apropos. And this is what makes it inimitable, as compared to that of the mediocre academic who parrots this and that source, only to break a tiny bit of new ground to procure a PhD. The prose of the mediocre academic is generic enough to be low hanging fruit for AI imitation. “Chat GPT, cite sources A-Z on X, and then give it an interesting twist!” Lepore’s prose, on the contrary, is unique and immediately identifiable. She rambles to and fro and, just as the reader might get frustrated, ties all the ideas together into a coherent whole, in this case, painting a vast story of how humans created machines, inevitably leading to dehumanization, which is followed by sagacious humans predicting how awful their creation will be, beginning with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and culminating with works in the newly created Science Fiction genre which predicts our sorry plight today. And the irony is that the tech masters, i.e. the Overlords, like Musk, Alman, and Andreesen were enthralled and influenced by these seminal Sci Fi works without realizing that they were a warning and not a “How To” manual. It leaves the reader feeling awful and in despair.
Like most books that clarify and explain a dire issue facing humanity, e.g. global warming and surveillance capitalism, the pessimism outweighs the optimism. Ms. Lepore tells us, in the early chapters that she thinks the AI revolution is doomed and that she will elaborate why in the final chapter. I was disappointed to discover how brief and full of false hope the final chapter is, especially in light of the extensive damage to our planet that Ms. Lepore chronicles. I would like to think that the Pollyanna belief she espouses will prevail, but have my doubts.
September 27, 2026
I am very familiar with Jill Lepore as a historian and have read several of her books. That is why I was a bit surprised by this book. Science fiction has never really been my thing. I have always been attracted to nonfiction or fine literature. For these reasons, at times, I was a bit uninterested in the context. That said, the scope of this book is near-exhaustive, and the information is valuable and interesting.
Lepore begins well back in history to explore the origins of AI, from tales of robots or other artificial beings rising and taking over Earth to sources of AI that have hacked into other systems and created problems. From a period of time when scientists did not believe that animals had any sense of feeling (thereby justifying the vivisection of live animals on tables in scientific labs to Data centers using extraordinary amounts of water and electricity, the author explains its development, its value, and its dangers. She has traced the history of the "tech bros" from their inception if Silicon Valley to their current status as the worlds' wealthiest men. The debate over the rights of robots are discussed both in the "real" world and through science fiction. Will AI become so advanced that man will become its slave rather than the other way around?
In a very short conclusion, Lepore asserts that the solution is to disable the computers that threaten us and to protect resources and wildlife that are required for human existence, all the while being aware that the bros see a future where AI has taken over. They have chosen different plans of escape. Musk plans to be on Mars, while others have properties they will escape to, leaving the rest of us to fend for ourselves.
Lepore begins well back in history to explore the origins of AI, from tales of robots or other artificial beings rising and taking over Earth to sources of AI that have hacked into other systems and created problems. From a period of time when scientists did not believe that animals had any sense of feeling (thereby justifying the vivisection of live animals on tables in scientific labs to Data centers using extraordinary amounts of water and electricity, the author explains its development, its value, and its dangers. She has traced the history of the "tech bros" from their inception if Silicon Valley to their current status as the worlds' wealthiest men. The debate over the rights of robots are discussed both in the "real" world and through science fiction. Will AI become so advanced that man will become its slave rather than the other way around?
In a very short conclusion, Lepore asserts that the solution is to disable the computers that threaten us and to protect resources and wildlife that are required for human existence, all the while being aware that the bros see a future where AI has taken over. They have chosen different plans of escape. Musk plans to be on Mars, while others have properties they will escape to, leaving the rest of us to fend for ourselves.
August 30, 2026
Lepore’s argument against the “artificial state” could be made in a brief essay. The book meanders through long discussions about tech titans’ takes on science fiction they read growing up, a history of 20th century science fiction and robotics, animal rights, and environmental devastation.
The “artificial state” is, apparently, the political clout of the corporations building out AI and their ability to manipulate our emotions and politics through their algorithms. The book fails to address what we need to do to reign in this artificial state, other than to exhort us to exercise our right as “the people” to revolt against it.
The “artificial state” is, apparently, the political clout of the corporations building out AI and their ability to manipulate our emotions and politics through their algorithms. The book fails to address what we need to do to reign in this artificial state, other than to exhort us to exercise our right as “the people” to revolt against it.
August 26, 2026
Not for me but recommend that each reader dive in and make their own decisions on whether or not the book is a good read.
September 3, 2026
Book Review: "The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State" by Jill Lepore, read by the author
Rating: ★★☆☆ (2/5) Reading time: ~4 minutes
Thanks to NetGalley, W.W. Norton, and RBmedia for providing an advance audiobook copy for review.
About the author
Jill Lepore is the David Woods Kemper '41 Professor of American History at Harvard University, a professor at Harvard Law School, and a staff writer at The New Yorker. She's the author of several bestselling, prizewinning works of history, including "These Truths" and "We the People." She's a historian first — and that scholarly instinct is both this book's foundation and, per this listening experience, its biggest obstacle.
An eight-hour audiobook that argues machines are quietly taking over civic life shouldn't require this much endurance from the human on the other end of the headphones.
That's the central frustration with "The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State," Lepore's expansive case that data, algorithms, and corporate infrastructure have been steadily replacing the machinery of democratic government. The idea is urgent. The delivery, in this listener's experience, wasn't.
Why it matters
The premise is a serious one, and timely: that the "artificial state" — governance by algorithm and corporate architecture rather than consent — has been assembling itself for a century, and that nothing about its rise was inevitable. That's a genuinely important argument, expanded from an essay Lepore wrote for The New Yorker in 2024. The ambition here is real.
Where it struggles
The trouble is scale and pacing, not substance. What plays as a sharp, urgent argument at essay length stretches thin across a full book — digressions into subjects like the history of animal dissection, in service of a broader point about science and technology, add texture for some readers but read as padding for others. What could have been a tight five-hour case instead runs closer to eight, and in an audiobook, that gap is felt in real time. A book built around a single, forceful argument benefits from getting in, making its case, and getting out — and this one, in this listening experience, doesn't move with that urgency.
The self-narration question
Lepore narrates her own book, and results on this front vary. In this experience, the delivery came across as flat where the material called for emphasis — historical figures and case studies that needed a lift in tone to land instead blurred together in a steady, even register, and attempts at wit didn't fully break through the pacing.
It's worth saying plainly: that's not the universal verdict. The book carries a starred Kirkus review and blurbs from writers like Jaron Lanier and Elizabeth Kolbert, and at least one other listener has described Lepore's own narration as clear and well-paced, closer to sitting in on a good lecture than slogging through one. Self-narration by an academic author is always a gamble — sometimes it adds authenticity, sometimes it lacks the vocal range a professional narrator brings — and the divide in how it's landing suggests this is one of those cases where it comes down to what a given listener needs from a narrator to stay locked in.
What works
The intellectual scaffolding is sound. Lepore is a serious historian working a serious argument, and the connections she draws — from Hannah Arendt's mid-century warnings about the "machine age" to today's algorithmic politics — are the kind of long-arc thinking her other books are known for. The ideas in here are worth having. They just may be better encountered in the original essay, or in a format that lets you set your own pace, than in an nine-hour listen.
The bottom line
"The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State" makes a case worth making, but this listening experience found the delivery worked against the urgency of the argument — dense, slow, and, at times, a genuine test of endurance. Readers who prefer to move at their own pace, or who are drawn to Lepore's long-form historical style specifically, may fare better with it in print than this listener did in audio.
Rating: ★★☆☆ (2/5) Reading time: ~4 minutes
Thanks to NetGalley, W.W. Norton, and RBmedia for providing an advance audiobook copy for review.
About the author
Jill Lepore is the David Woods Kemper '41 Professor of American History at Harvard University, a professor at Harvard Law School, and a staff writer at The New Yorker. She's the author of several bestselling, prizewinning works of history, including "These Truths" and "We the People." She's a historian first — and that scholarly instinct is both this book's foundation and, per this listening experience, its biggest obstacle.
An eight-hour audiobook that argues machines are quietly taking over civic life shouldn't require this much endurance from the human on the other end of the headphones.
That's the central frustration with "The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State," Lepore's expansive case that data, algorithms, and corporate infrastructure have been steadily replacing the machinery of democratic government. The idea is urgent. The delivery, in this listener's experience, wasn't.
Why it matters
The premise is a serious one, and timely: that the "artificial state" — governance by algorithm and corporate architecture rather than consent — has been assembling itself for a century, and that nothing about its rise was inevitable. That's a genuinely important argument, expanded from an essay Lepore wrote for The New Yorker in 2024. The ambition here is real.
Where it struggles
The trouble is scale and pacing, not substance. What plays as a sharp, urgent argument at essay length stretches thin across a full book — digressions into subjects like the history of animal dissection, in service of a broader point about science and technology, add texture for some readers but read as padding for others. What could have been a tight five-hour case instead runs closer to eight, and in an audiobook, that gap is felt in real time. A book built around a single, forceful argument benefits from getting in, making its case, and getting out — and this one, in this listening experience, doesn't move with that urgency.
The self-narration question
Lepore narrates her own book, and results on this front vary. In this experience, the delivery came across as flat where the material called for emphasis — historical figures and case studies that needed a lift in tone to land instead blurred together in a steady, even register, and attempts at wit didn't fully break through the pacing.
It's worth saying plainly: that's not the universal verdict. The book carries a starred Kirkus review and blurbs from writers like Jaron Lanier and Elizabeth Kolbert, and at least one other listener has described Lepore's own narration as clear and well-paced, closer to sitting in on a good lecture than slogging through one. Self-narration by an academic author is always a gamble — sometimes it adds authenticity, sometimes it lacks the vocal range a professional narrator brings — and the divide in how it's landing suggests this is one of those cases where it comes down to what a given listener needs from a narrator to stay locked in.
What works
The intellectual scaffolding is sound. Lepore is a serious historian working a serious argument, and the connections she draws — from Hannah Arendt's mid-century warnings about the "machine age" to today's algorithmic politics — are the kind of long-arc thinking her other books are known for. The ideas in here are worth having. They just may be better encountered in the original essay, or in a format that lets you set your own pace, than in an nine-hour listen.
The bottom line
"The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State" makes a case worth making, but this listening experience found the delivery worked against the urgency of the argument — dense, slow, and, at times, a genuine test of endurance. Readers who prefer to move at their own pace, or who are drawn to Lepore's long-form historical style specifically, may fare better with it in print than this listener did in audio.
August 29, 2026
This engaging and wide-ranging book traces humanity's fascination with technology: its promises and pitfalls. I learned about many things, including a political movement in the 1930s in the US and Canada that promoted "technocracy" as a new and better system of government. There are many references to science fiction, and especially to how influential the classic works may have been when members of the billionaires' club were in their formative years. (This goes a long way towards explaining their collective penchant for space exploration, colonizing Mars, and/or buying their own islands!)
The book outlines the drivers of data collection, the focus on data science, and the dangers of the unimpeded growth of data centers and AI access. It's so chock-full of well-presented history, current ideas, and forward-looking concerns that I'll be going back to it again and again.
It's a big-picture look at how we got to this Artificial State, with plenty of detail that drives home the importance of knowing what we can do to help dismantle it before the bots decide they no longer need humans.
The author does an excellent job reading the audiobook, which is based on some of her lectures and essays with new material. Yet, it comes across as a seamless work that builds a sense of urgency if not inevitability. My thanks to the author, publisher, @RBMedia, and #NetGalley for access to the audiobook for review purposes. It is now available.
The book outlines the drivers of data collection, the focus on data science, and the dangers of the unimpeded growth of data centers and AI access. It's so chock-full of well-presented history, current ideas, and forward-looking concerns that I'll be going back to it again and again.
It's a big-picture look at how we got to this Artificial State, with plenty of detail that drives home the importance of knowing what we can do to help dismantle it before the bots decide they no longer need humans.
The author does an excellent job reading the audiobook, which is based on some of her lectures and essays with new material. Yet, it comes across as a seamless work that builds a sense of urgency if not inevitability. My thanks to the author, publisher, @RBMedia, and #NetGalley for access to the audiobook for review purposes. It is now available.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 21, 2026
This was a bit of a wild card pick for me considering I don't follow much of the AI developments / industry (living in my own hospital bubble), but I was hoping to branch out some... and Jill Lepore has been so well-acclaimed in her writing (We the People more recently). This was a short read, but I found I got lost often in the text. It may have been better to read this in the context of a class with discussion, especially as I felt it was easy to glaze over how some ideas (e.g. juxtaposition of nature / animal rights movement with artificial machines) were very nuanced.
That being said, it does present some interesting take-home points about why we have always worried that AI will "exterminate" mankind (seeing AI as a "corporation" with ultra-capitalism), how we fear AI will treat mankind as "animals," and proving that many of these concerns about the artificial state have been in play for years (since the 1970s, for example, writing about "the atomized person" ~ today's echo chambers).
That being said, it does present some interesting take-home points about why we have always worried that AI will "exterminate" mankind (seeing AI as a "corporation" with ultra-capitalism), how we fear AI will treat mankind as "animals," and proving that many of these concerns about the artificial state have been in play for years (since the 1970s, for example, writing about "the atomized person" ~ today's echo chambers).
September 11, 2026
I adore Jill Lepore. Her writing is uncannily thoughtful, and I love her narrating voice to boot. I listened to all of her podcast The Last Archive a few years ago, and have been sad it seems to have come to an end.
In seeing she had a new book about AI and its architects, I couldn't check out the audiobook fast enough. The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State is an exhaustive history, not just of our relationship with the concept of machines, but how human technological progress has often come at the cost of ruthless disregard and disdain for the natural world. At times this book feels less like a takedown of AI and the goons (or, as Lepore calls them with more class than I possess, "merchant princes") driving it, and more like a call to action for conservationists everywhere.
The artificial state as defined by Lepore is an indictment of our current moment: government not by people but automation, and the profit-driven motives of so many of our power brokers being allowed to pursue this goal at the expense of all else. She even quotes Sam Altman positing that one day, the entire world will be covered in data centers, bringing to horrific reality all those science fiction cautionary tales I used to think we were on the same page about. But Altman, Musk, Zuckerberg and their ilk were so disdainful of the humanities, so unlearned in their approaches to literary analysis, that they took these dire predictions of the future not as warnings, but as instruction manuals.
In another review, it mentions that in a book cataloguing the "rise and fall," Lepore is quite short on the "fall" part of the artificial state. And to some degree, I agree with this. Actual proscriptions of the fall involves the usual suspects: vote them out, pass legislation for regulations, stop rolling back protections on wildlife preservation, etc. But I think it actually goes deeper than that. If you listen closely, the fall of the artificial state is baked into its rise. The premise is so fallacious, the benefit so vanishingly small for most of humanity, that one day the house of cards is destined to fall — and at last, we'll point and laugh and announce that the emperor has no clothes.
In one of her most striking anecdotes, Lepore tells of a man in the 1700s so determined to prove that artificial men are the same as humans that he built an automaton that could play chess. This was a wonder for some time, no doubt wowing observers and piquing my interest as I stood in the produce aisle with the audiobook on my headphones. How was such a thing accomplished?
By having a short, human chess player hidden inside, making all the moves.
I can think of no better analogy of the so-called technological wonders being forced on us now. Whether it's LLMs that spit out pretty but meaningless prose, or warnings that the AI future is "inevitable" and we must adapt, or the advent of "driverless cars" – actually remote driven by workers in the Philippines being paid pennies on the dollar – it's all a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The fall of the artificial state can't come fast enough for me. I just hope we haven't, as Lepore warns, destroyed the planet by then.
In seeing she had a new book about AI and its architects, I couldn't check out the audiobook fast enough. The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State is an exhaustive history, not just of our relationship with the concept of machines, but how human technological progress has often come at the cost of ruthless disregard and disdain for the natural world. At times this book feels less like a takedown of AI and the goons (or, as Lepore calls them with more class than I possess, "merchant princes") driving it, and more like a call to action for conservationists everywhere.
The artificial state as defined by Lepore is an indictment of our current moment: government not by people but automation, and the profit-driven motives of so many of our power brokers being allowed to pursue this goal at the expense of all else. She even quotes Sam Altman positing that one day, the entire world will be covered in data centers, bringing to horrific reality all those science fiction cautionary tales I used to think we were on the same page about. But Altman, Musk, Zuckerberg and their ilk were so disdainful of the humanities, so unlearned in their approaches to literary analysis, that they took these dire predictions of the future not as warnings, but as instruction manuals.
In another review, it mentions that in a book cataloguing the "rise and fall," Lepore is quite short on the "fall" part of the artificial state. And to some degree, I agree with this. Actual proscriptions of the fall involves the usual suspects: vote them out, pass legislation for regulations, stop rolling back protections on wildlife preservation, etc. But I think it actually goes deeper than that. If you listen closely, the fall of the artificial state is baked into its rise. The premise is so fallacious, the benefit so vanishingly small for most of humanity, that one day the house of cards is destined to fall — and at last, we'll point and laugh and announce that the emperor has no clothes.
In one of her most striking anecdotes, Lepore tells of a man in the 1700s so determined to prove that artificial men are the same as humans that he built an automaton that could play chess. This was a wonder for some time, no doubt wowing observers and piquing my interest as I stood in the produce aisle with the audiobook on my headphones. How was such a thing accomplished?
By having a short, human chess player hidden inside, making all the moves.
I can think of no better analogy of the so-called technological wonders being forced on us now. Whether it's LLMs that spit out pretty but meaningless prose, or warnings that the AI future is "inevitable" and we must adapt, or the advent of "driverless cars" – actually remote driven by workers in the Philippines being paid pennies on the dollar – it's all a bunch of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The fall of the artificial state can't come fast enough for me. I just hope we haven't, as Lepore warns, destroyed the planet by then.
September 2, 2026
3.5. I'm so steeped in this subject from reading stacks of prior books that overlap and therefore I'm not an ideal reviewer so factor that in what I have to write.
This book moves fast and I suspect often leaves a fair amount of critical insights out. For example the author provides great detail and sets up expectations regarding the three methods used on election night 1952 to analyze returns. The three rival networks used either computers (two of them) or humans, and made competing promises regarding how quickly and accurately they would perform. But then the author just moves on and neglects to provide closure on how they performed.
In fact this book is so... overstuffed with ideas, anecdotes, comparisons and factoids that toward the end I felt like I was reading one of those books you used to find in bathrooms of certain homes that contain a hodge podge of fascinating but forgettable curiosities and 'did you know?' bits.
OK, this book is certainly not bad, it's simply that for me her thesis gets stretched thin at times and loses power vs the plethora of info. Ultimately I lost the thread towards the end and wasn't 100% certain why I was learning what I was learning despite it being sorta intriguing.
As far as conclusions and ways forward, the abrupt final chapter does offer some solace and encouragement with the author reminding the reader that the creation of an artificial state and AI's accelerating growth are not popular with the majority of citizens. "This isn't only about artificial intelligence or data centers. It's about the hijacking of public interest and the abandonment of the consent of the government." HALLELUJAH!
And yet I know that already. In fact most readers likely know this as well. It's all you read or hear about so... not all that revelatory. Alas there's no suggested follow up with actions to consider or minimally additional resources to seek ideas or inspiration. Instead the author follows the pattern of the book and unleashes a screenshot of catchy, encouraging observations and scattered 'inspirational' hoohah.
I suppose my frustration is a result of my growing tired of books that make the case for readers to be concerned about the trajectory we as a society are on, detail and document where we came from, where we are and look out, how bad it will potentially get, and then offer no follow up. I'm not demanding an activist book but it's clear the author has an opinion yet they choose to abrogate their responsibility to do more than inform. In so doing they will likely leave most readers depressed and flaccid vs informed, activated and inspired. Argh!
This book moves fast and I suspect often leaves a fair amount of critical insights out. For example the author provides great detail and sets up expectations regarding the three methods used on election night 1952 to analyze returns. The three rival networks used either computers (two of them) or humans, and made competing promises regarding how quickly and accurately they would perform. But then the author just moves on and neglects to provide closure on how they performed.
In fact this book is so... overstuffed with ideas, anecdotes, comparisons and factoids that toward the end I felt like I was reading one of those books you used to find in bathrooms of certain homes that contain a hodge podge of fascinating but forgettable curiosities and 'did you know?' bits.
OK, this book is certainly not bad, it's simply that for me her thesis gets stretched thin at times and loses power vs the plethora of info. Ultimately I lost the thread towards the end and wasn't 100% certain why I was learning what I was learning despite it being sorta intriguing.
As far as conclusions and ways forward, the abrupt final chapter does offer some solace and encouragement with the author reminding the reader that the creation of an artificial state and AI's accelerating growth are not popular with the majority of citizens. "This isn't only about artificial intelligence or data centers. It's about the hijacking of public interest and the abandonment of the consent of the government." HALLELUJAH!
And yet I know that already. In fact most readers likely know this as well. It's all you read or hear about so... not all that revelatory. Alas there's no suggested follow up with actions to consider or minimally additional resources to seek ideas or inspiration. Instead the author follows the pattern of the book and unleashes a screenshot of catchy, encouraging observations and scattered 'inspirational' hoohah.
I suppose my frustration is a result of my growing tired of books that make the case for readers to be concerned about the trajectory we as a society are on, detail and document where we came from, where we are and look out, how bad it will potentially get, and then offer no follow up. I'm not demanding an activist book but it's clear the author has an opinion yet they choose to abrogate their responsibility to do more than inform. In so doing they will likely leave most readers depressed and flaccid vs informed, activated and inspired. Argh!
September 23, 2026
Pros
Well written and easy to follow, and genuinely interesting in its details: AI being modeled after capitalism with the same embedded assumptions, tech oligarchs drawing their playbook from sci-fi, the stated goals of the people building these systems, and the question of what actually constitutes a "person" in the age of AI. These are fascinating threads worth pulling.
Cons
>>What is the point of this book? It catalogs known problems with AI and the strategists behind it, but never lands on a destination. A return to a previous era? Halting AI altogether? Overthrowing the tech oligarchs? A new constitutional convention? Without a thesis that points somewhere, the details feel like an elaborate shrug, a well-reported emptiness.
>>The author claims liberal democracy existed for roughly 60 years, from 1945 to 2005, which is historical fantasy. The U.S. wasn't even a democracy on paper until the civil rights amendments of the 1960s, so whose democracy is she describing? And if that era represents liberal democracy at its peak, it's a deeply wanting peak. U.S.-backed coups around the world, intelligence agencies running live experiments on American citizens, corporations funding disinformation campaigns to block environmental and food legislation, and this is the gold standard? Only someone historically incurious or heavily invested in their own narrative would make that claim without qualification.
>>The author never satisfactorily defines "artificial" or "state," which undermines one of the book's central arguments. Somehow an AI-supported state becomes "artificial", implying that what came before was organic. But a state is an artificial construction by definition. The founders themselves viewed the Constitution as a machine, with legislators as mechanics who update and replace its parts. Calling that "organic" isn't an argument, it's a confusion. And it's one of the main reasons the book feels like it's built on sand.
>>Because the author treats the current moment as a unique rupture in American history, she misses that it's the latest iteration of a very old pattern: oligarchs using political machinery to consolidate power and wealth after periods of popular gains. The founders of 1787 worked in secrecy to ratify a document that handed power back to the propertied class after the Revolution. The industrialists of the 1870s dismantled the political gains of the 1860s. The oligarchs of the postwar era did the same to the New Deal. And it's happening again now. Missing that cycle doesn't just weaken the analysis: it makes the book's alarm feel naive misguided, just another distraction from America's original sin: oligarchic rule.
Summary
This book is at its most interesting in its details: the ideological DNA of AI, the sci-fi fantasies animating the tech oligarch class, the philosophical questions about personhood and power that the current moment is forcing into the open. But it collapses under the weight of its own analytical failures. The central arguments rest on undefined terms, a selective and sanitized reading of American democratic history, and a stubborn insistence that what's happening now is historically unprecedented rather than historically familiar. Worst of all, the book never answers the question it implicitly raises: so what do we do? Observation without direction isn't analysis; it's misdirected dread dressed up in research. Worth reading for the details it surfaces; deeply frustrating for the thinking it fails to do.
Well written and easy to follow, and genuinely interesting in its details: AI being modeled after capitalism with the same embedded assumptions, tech oligarchs drawing their playbook from sci-fi, the stated goals of the people building these systems, and the question of what actually constitutes a "person" in the age of AI. These are fascinating threads worth pulling.
Cons
>>What is the point of this book? It catalogs known problems with AI and the strategists behind it, but never lands on a destination. A return to a previous era? Halting AI altogether? Overthrowing the tech oligarchs? A new constitutional convention? Without a thesis that points somewhere, the details feel like an elaborate shrug, a well-reported emptiness.
>>The author claims liberal democracy existed for roughly 60 years, from 1945 to 2005, which is historical fantasy. The U.S. wasn't even a democracy on paper until the civil rights amendments of the 1960s, so whose democracy is she describing? And if that era represents liberal democracy at its peak, it's a deeply wanting peak. U.S.-backed coups around the world, intelligence agencies running live experiments on American citizens, corporations funding disinformation campaigns to block environmental and food legislation, and this is the gold standard? Only someone historically incurious or heavily invested in their own narrative would make that claim without qualification.
>>The author never satisfactorily defines "artificial" or "state," which undermines one of the book's central arguments. Somehow an AI-supported state becomes "artificial", implying that what came before was organic. But a state is an artificial construction by definition. The founders themselves viewed the Constitution as a machine, with legislators as mechanics who update and replace its parts. Calling that "organic" isn't an argument, it's a confusion. And it's one of the main reasons the book feels like it's built on sand.
>>Because the author treats the current moment as a unique rupture in American history, she misses that it's the latest iteration of a very old pattern: oligarchs using political machinery to consolidate power and wealth after periods of popular gains. The founders of 1787 worked in secrecy to ratify a document that handed power back to the propertied class after the Revolution. The industrialists of the 1870s dismantled the political gains of the 1860s. The oligarchs of the postwar era did the same to the New Deal. And it's happening again now. Missing that cycle doesn't just weaken the analysis: it makes the book's alarm feel naive misguided, just another distraction from America's original sin: oligarchic rule.
Summary
This book is at its most interesting in its details: the ideological DNA of AI, the sci-fi fantasies animating the tech oligarch class, the philosophical questions about personhood and power that the current moment is forcing into the open. But it collapses under the weight of its own analytical failures. The central arguments rest on undefined terms, a selective and sanitized reading of American democratic history, and a stubborn insistence that what's happening now is historically unprecedented rather than historically familiar. Worst of all, the book never answers the question it implicitly raises: so what do we do? Observation without direction isn't analysis; it's misdirected dread dressed up in research. Worth reading for the details it surfaces; deeply frustrating for the thinking it fails to do.
September 26, 2026
I appreciated the history and contextual understanding I gained of AI and it's connection to prior technocrat movements of the past. While I agree with Lepore's views (that an over-reliance on AI as a society is net bad for our democracy and environment) the book does not explore how having a CHOICE of wether or not to use AI is in itself a bit of a class-marker and a luxury good some people cannot afford.
Many companies and organizations are outright demanding that their employees and staff use and rely on AI. Job seekers are encouraged to list AI tools on their resumes and to embrace in their interviews the utilization of AI to complete tasks quicker and therefore cheaper. Being outright antagonistic towards AI and refusing to use it in many corporate spaces can cost you at work and is frankly not a luxury many of us have.
Something that has bothered me recently as I have searched for jobs is being asked the question of "what do you think of AI." This is a political question that feels almost like asking "are you a liberal or a conservative" in a job interview. Some companies want you to embrace AI wholeheartedly. Others want you to shun it completely. There's not a way to know other than context clues how the interviewer across from you and the company writ-large feel might feel about AI going in, so it feels like a gotchya question to me. There is no safe answer that costs you nothing and still says something of substance.
To those who by the nature of their class status and who are secure in their jobs and have the money and options to tell their boss, job, corporations and large language models to shove it: I salute you. However, many of us job seekers and corporate baddies don't have this same luxury. And when people act like they "don't use AI" to them I say: if you ever buy something from a major store online, choose a show to watch from the recommended choices on your streaming app, or select your next book to read based off what you see here on Goodreads (owned by Amazon and Jeff Bezos) those recommendations and choices are being fed and influenced by algorithms often powered by the predictive capabilities of Large Language Models.
While I appreciate vociferously anti-AI people and the camp they prescribe too, when they act like they never use this technology or never interact with it even unintentionally, and that those who do are lazy and unethical they are lacking nuance and it comes across as a bit entitled and 'holier-than-thou'. Sometimes people must use AI and interact it with in their workplace and if you are someone who doesnt have as much choice in the matter at times, I don't believe it makes you less of a good person. It means the issue is complex and varied and shows just how embedded these technologies have become in our work lives and leisure pursuits.
I do not believe that AI itself is the core problem, more so that human greed, short-sightedness, and blind self-interest and the pursuit of individual achievement and money above all else are always our greatest downfalls and the root of all evil. On that Jill Lepore and I certainly agree.
Many companies and organizations are outright demanding that their employees and staff use and rely on AI. Job seekers are encouraged to list AI tools on their resumes and to embrace in their interviews the utilization of AI to complete tasks quicker and therefore cheaper. Being outright antagonistic towards AI and refusing to use it in many corporate spaces can cost you at work and is frankly not a luxury many of us have.
Something that has bothered me recently as I have searched for jobs is being asked the question of "what do you think of AI." This is a political question that feels almost like asking "are you a liberal or a conservative" in a job interview. Some companies want you to embrace AI wholeheartedly. Others want you to shun it completely. There's not a way to know other than context clues how the interviewer across from you and the company writ-large feel might feel about AI going in, so it feels like a gotchya question to me. There is no safe answer that costs you nothing and still says something of substance.
To those who by the nature of their class status and who are secure in their jobs and have the money and options to tell their boss, job, corporations and large language models to shove it: I salute you. However, many of us job seekers and corporate baddies don't have this same luxury. And when people act like they "don't use AI" to them I say: if you ever buy something from a major store online, choose a show to watch from the recommended choices on your streaming app, or select your next book to read based off what you see here on Goodreads (owned by Amazon and Jeff Bezos) those recommendations and choices are being fed and influenced by algorithms often powered by the predictive capabilities of Large Language Models.
While I appreciate vociferously anti-AI people and the camp they prescribe too, when they act like they never use this technology or never interact with it even unintentionally, and that those who do are lazy and unethical they are lacking nuance and it comes across as a bit entitled and 'holier-than-thou'. Sometimes people must use AI and interact it with in their workplace and if you are someone who doesnt have as much choice in the matter at times, I don't believe it makes you less of a good person. It means the issue is complex and varied and shows just how embedded these technologies have become in our work lives and leisure pursuits.
I do not believe that AI itself is the core problem, more so that human greed, short-sightedness, and blind self-interest and the pursuit of individual achievement and money above all else are always our greatest downfalls and the root of all evil. On that Jill Lepore and I certainly agree.
September 8, 2026
In 1955, Isaac Asimov imagined how humans lost the ability to vote to machines. Jill Lepore lets us know that humans didn’t unknowingly give machines power over us. Greed, corruption and a techno libertarianism overwhelmed regulation and created this moment where even AI cheerleaders believe we may have let the robots out of the barn.
Robota is a Czech word for forced labor or serfdom. Robots were imagined as our slaves, like beasts of burden. Plants and trees and other animals were there for our pleasure, to eat, clothe or amuse us. Now many species are gone, but we have robot dogs that ice wants to use to corral black or brown people who may or may not have green cards or be US citizens.
A small group of techno millionaires now don’t want to hire humans, preferring agentic Ai. Here’s how this came about. They have US clearance to destroy the world as long as China doesn’t get AI first.
Lepore shows the source code that inspired Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and Sam Altman — science fiction stories and films — and how each techno billionaire profoundly misinterpreted the books and the writers. As a kid in South Africa, Musk, who later would push Trump’s Afrikaner First refugee policy, adored “A Hitchiker’s Guide to the Universe,” which Douglas Adams wrote on a manual typewriter with a “No Apartheid” sticker on it.
These days, even early proponents of Mars settlement think it’s not feasible before 3000 instead of Musk’s 2043. Said writer Kim Stanley Robinson: First we should take care of Earth.
“The rise of the artificial state was not fated,” Lepore concludes. “It was anticipated.”
Humans now spend more time indoors and speak fewer words than they once did, kept indoors by pollution and an addiction to machines. We’re lost connection witn animals and natural surroundings. We are being told that the thing than makes us human — empathy — is weakness.
But Lepore says that with everything from data centers to widespread Flock surveillance, humans still can consent to be governed, instead of being squashed by greedy, mentally untethered and unstable billionaires.
Ai that tells a billionaire what he wants to hear may muffle a billionaire from the lesson of the tale of a King Midas — greed will get you in the end.
Robota is a Czech word for forced labor or serfdom. Robots were imagined as our slaves, like beasts of burden. Plants and trees and other animals were there for our pleasure, to eat, clothe or amuse us. Now many species are gone, but we have robot dogs that ice wants to use to corral black or brown people who may or may not have green cards or be US citizens.
A small group of techno millionaires now don’t want to hire humans, preferring agentic Ai. Here’s how this came about. They have US clearance to destroy the world as long as China doesn’t get AI first.
Lepore shows the source code that inspired Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and Sam Altman — science fiction stories and films — and how each techno billionaire profoundly misinterpreted the books and the writers. As a kid in South Africa, Musk, who later would push Trump’s Afrikaner First refugee policy, adored “A Hitchiker’s Guide to the Universe,” which Douglas Adams wrote on a manual typewriter with a “No Apartheid” sticker on it.
These days, even early proponents of Mars settlement think it’s not feasible before 3000 instead of Musk’s 2043. Said writer Kim Stanley Robinson: First we should take care of Earth.
“The rise of the artificial state was not fated,” Lepore concludes. “It was anticipated.”
Humans now spend more time indoors and speak fewer words than they once did, kept indoors by pollution and an addiction to machines. We’re lost connection witn animals and natural surroundings. We are being told that the thing than makes us human — empathy — is weakness.
But Lepore says that with everything from data centers to widespread Flock surveillance, humans still can consent to be governed, instead of being squashed by greedy, mentally untethered and unstable billionaires.
Ai that tells a billionaire what he wants to hear may muffle a billionaire from the lesson of the tale of a King Midas — greed will get you in the end.
September 23, 2026
History on the artificial state and how there have always been warning signs about the dangers of this kind of technology yet capitalism won over placing any kind of regulations (simplistic synopsis, the book is much more detailed). Instead now we have AI bots everywhere pushing far right propaganda and deepfakes.
A really important read to understand more about AI and the Silicon Valley bros. Confirmed what I already knew about men like Musk, Zuckerberg, Thiel, Altman etc. They are losers trying to make themselves cool with technology and money and create the made up worlds they read about in science fiction books yet completely lacked critical reading skills and missed the entire point these books were trying to make.
It’s all pretty depressing. Lepore, in her epilogue, does try to add some semblance of hope, stating that 60% of US believes there should be regulations and then mentions something about standing up for our rights. With how things are and with how apathetic people (especially in the USA) are I don’t have very high hopes of sweeping changes. But hopefully we as a society wake up and fight against these techoligarchs and politicians who don’t care about us and only care about lining their pockets.
A really important read to understand more about AI and the Silicon Valley bros. Confirmed what I already knew about men like Musk, Zuckerberg, Thiel, Altman etc. They are losers trying to make themselves cool with technology and money and create the made up worlds they read about in science fiction books yet completely lacked critical reading skills and missed the entire point these books were trying to make.
It’s all pretty depressing. Lepore, in her epilogue, does try to add some semblance of hope, stating that 60% of US believes there should be regulations and then mentions something about standing up for our rights. With how things are and with how apathetic people (especially in the USA) are I don’t have very high hopes of sweeping changes. But hopefully we as a society wake up and fight against these techoligarchs and politicians who don’t care about us and only care about lining their pockets.
Did Not Finish
August 5, 2026Got my hands on an advanced copy. Currently DNF - really enjoyed the chapters about social media corporations, plus some interesting tidbits about the rise of data collection, but the part II that focused more on science fiction didn’t grab me. This is a personal preference, as I wanted more policy / political analysis instead of a discussion of how robots are treated in fiction. But, that’s not the book LePore wrote, so I really shouldn’t count it against her!
(Side note: while we’re on the portrayal of robots + AI in fiction, I was curious to see that LePore didn’t talk much about the marvel universe, arguably the most popular modern portrayal of it, what with ultron & the algorithm that was going to decide which humans to kill. I feel like she skipped over a lot of 21st century media.)
(Side note: while we’re on the portrayal of robots + AI in fiction, I was curious to see that LePore didn’t talk much about the marvel universe, arguably the most popular modern portrayal of it, what with ultron & the algorithm that was going to decide which humans to kill. I feel like she skipped over a lot of 21st century media.)
September 30, 2026
Three stars because it was never boring, but loses stars for the failure to stay on point and make a clear argument. The amount of references to science fiction books, movies, and tv, got in the way of the argument or was a way to fill pages without substance. Science fiction isn’t reality whether it has accurately described reality in the past or not. I wanted more substance on the current state of AI and the near future. There are better things to read if that’s what you’re looking for, but if you want a history of major science fiction works, this book delivers.
September 16, 2026
If Jill Lepore is hopeful, I guess I will be too. If the explosion of AI snuck up on you, this book is for you. Nothing is overly technical, but Lepore follows the human desire for building increasingly artificial states throughout history.
It was fascinating to read many of the final chapters as this week Altman, Musk, and Amodei have been calling again for regulatory oversight by the government.
It was fascinating to read many of the final chapters as this week Altman, Musk, and Amodei have been calling again for regulatory oversight by the government.
September 27, 2026
It's unfortunate Jill discredited herself in the first eight pages of the book by grouping Trump with other actual authoritarians such as Putin and Erdogan. More unfortunate for me was spending $30 on a book that sounded like it had a good premise only to realize the author is ideologically captured in the first eight pages.
To support her Trump claim, she cites the "Democracy Index" from 2006 and 2016, and then shifts to "by the 2020s, slight more than half of Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine believed either that American democracy was 'in trouble' or that the country was a 'failed democracy.'
The irony here is pretty astounding and the only way she couldn't see it is due to the aforementioned problem of being ideologically captured. Part of her argument is that "democracies" (the citizens in the democracies) are being unduly influenced by AI algorithms, and her evidence of this is the circular logic that young people think so. Public opinion is never evidence of anything, but it's even funnier here given the context.
If I would have done a simple google search of Jill Lepore and looked at her picture I would have known this was going to be an ideologically slanted book, but alas, I did not. If you're a leftist and want a guilty pleasure read, this might be up your alley. But if you're looking for an objective look at AI and government you won't find it here, unfortunately.
To support her Trump claim, she cites the "Democracy Index" from 2006 and 2016, and then shifts to "by the 2020s, slight more than half of Americans between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine believed either that American democracy was 'in trouble' or that the country was a 'failed democracy.'
The irony here is pretty astounding and the only way she couldn't see it is due to the aforementioned problem of being ideologically captured. Part of her argument is that "democracies" (the citizens in the democracies) are being unduly influenced by AI algorithms, and her evidence of this is the circular logic that young people think so. Public opinion is never evidence of anything, but it's even funnier here given the context.
If I would have done a simple google search of Jill Lepore and looked at her picture I would have known this was going to be an ideologically slanted book, but alas, I did not. If you're a leftist and want a guilty pleasure read, this might be up your alley. But if you're looking for an objective look at AI and government you won't find it here, unfortunately.
September 16, 2026
FULL of rlly interesting throughlines of dystopia/political philosophy/sci fi with 2026 arguments made by SV. My only complaint would be I wanted it to go onnn
Was not expecting the connection btw the extinction, oppression, subjugation of animals, and people’s anxieties that they will experience the same thing if another “species” is more capable than them… fascinating. We rlly need to tackle.
Was not expecting the connection btw the extinction, oppression, subjugation of animals, and people’s anxieties that they will experience the same thing if another “species” is more capable than them… fascinating. We rlly need to tackle.
September 29, 2026
I have enormous respect for Jill Lepore, but this book was both repetitive with her previous ones and much more of a history than the commentary on current events that I was expecting. However, she has been crushing her podcast/radio appearances while doing press for this, so I will continue listening to those
August 27, 2026
Very interesting context to why we are where we are with AI. It really veered into how it’s related to science fiction and animal welfare, to the point I did start to wonder when we’d get back to the main topic. I’m sure some people will find this detour annoying, but I enjoyed it.
September 20, 2026
Fantastic book. Jill Lepore is one of our best historians today and her approach to the rise of AI and technology blended perfectly with her history of mankind’s understanding of itself in nature. It’s scary, and her optimism didn’t assuage my pessimism, but I enjoyed this a lot nonetheless.
September 23, 2026
My favorite historian has provided us with a serious wake-up call. She given us the history of our interest in AI and warned us what those rich guys in Silicone Valley really want, and it's not to our ultimate benefit or maybe even survival. She does end on a hopeful note, but we have to pay attention!
October 3, 2026
This book was enjoyable, but far from eye-opening. I hoped it would include information I didn't already know. It did not.
September 21, 2026
4.03★: THE SCOPE, CAUSE, & REMEDIES ARE DEBATABLE... BUT THE THREATS EXIST. Jill Lepore is a Professor of American History and Professor of Law at Harvard, in addition to being a Staff Writer at The New Yorker. This book argues that liberal democracy is being displaced by an emerging artificial state: a privately owned, algorithmically mediated infrastructure that organizes political behavior and public discourse without meaningful democratic consent. In her view, this is not simply “AI in government,” but a broader system (stretching from polling, databases, and political marketing to social media, predictive systems, bots, and generative AI) that turns citizens into targets for behavioral manipulation.
THE BOOK’S ARGUMENT: Lepore presents the artificial state as “government by machine” in place of government by the consent of the governed. Its key feature is the fusion of corporate power, digital communications systems, data extraction, and automated decision-making: institutions that once belonged to public life are increasingly mediated by platforms and systems owned by a small set of companies and billionaires.
Her historical story begins with seemingly ordinary administrative ambitions: making states legible through censuses, records, identification, statistics, polling, and computational systems. Over time, she argues, the drive for efficiency and prediction helped create the conditions in which people could be categorized, profiled, targeted, and governed as data. The development is therefore not portrayed as an abrupt AI takeover, but as a long shift from counting citizens to managing them through increasingly granular data systems. The book has two broad movements:
MOVEMENT 1: “Government by Machine”
Focuses on political and technological history, tracing the arc from mid-20th century data systems through modern social media and AI. Its core claim is that democratic politics has been systematically reduced toward the automated mining and manipulation of human attention. A few examples I hadn’t previously known about:
MOVEMENT 2: “What Robots Want”
Focuses on sci-fi, exploring its historical warnings and its deep influence on modern technology leaders (like Musk, Altman, Zuckerberg). Its core claim is that Silicon Valley figures routinely treat sci-fi cautionary tales direct technical blueprints, prioritizing speculative future machine apocalypses while building corporate architectures that undermine present-day democratic systems. Her sci-fi references include:
For Lepore, the stakes are large: civil society, representative institutions, free expression, an informed electorate, equality before the law, and trust in elections can all be weakened when political communication is optimized around engagement and persuasion rather than public reasoning.
A SIMPLE ILLUSTRATION:
⚜️ Under a democratic model, a candidate makes a public argument that can be debated by everyone.
⚜️ Under Lepore’s artificial state model, a campaign or platform can use data to deliver different emotionally calibrated messages to thousands of narrow audiences, test which message produces a desired behavior, and then refine it automatically. The public sphere becomes less shared, less visible, and harder to hold accountable.
LEPORE’S PERSPECTIVE & BIASES: “Bias” here does not necessarily mean factual unreliability; it means the interpretive commitments that determine what she foregrounds and how she weighs the evidence.
COMMON CRITICISMS: The most common reservations are about scope, causation, and remedies — not about whether the threats she identifies exist.
KEY TERMS:
📕 THE ARTIFICIAL STATE: “the rule of humans by machines manufactured by corporations”, creating a structural landscape of “government without consent, even government without humans.”
📕 THE FACTORY FARMING OF HUMANS: “the sorting, segmenting, isolation and management of people by machines” —her explicit phrase for corporate data processing.
📕 ALGORITHMIC MICROTARGETING: “the reduction of politics to the digital manipulation of attention-mining algorithms”, which leaves “nearly every element of American democratic life... vulnerable to subversion.”
BOTTOM LINE
✅ The book is best read as a forceful historical-political indictment, not as a neutral technical survey of AI. Its central insight is that the danger is not machines acting alone: it is the transfer of public power into corporate-owned systems that classify, predict, persuade, and increasingly act on behalf of people.
✅ Its strongest contribution is giving a unifying name to the overlap between platform capitalism, automated governance, political microtargeting, and AI. Its principal weakness is that the concept can become so expansive (and the remedy so general) that it risks describing a powerful moral diagnosis more clearly than a precise causal theory or an implementable program of reform.
Published three weeks ago on 8/25/26, this book currently has a 4.03-star average by 348 GR peeps.
THE BOOK’S ARGUMENT: Lepore presents the artificial state as “government by machine” in place of government by the consent of the governed. Its key feature is the fusion of corporate power, digital communications systems, data extraction, and automated decision-making: institutions that once belonged to public life are increasingly mediated by platforms and systems owned by a small set of companies and billionaires.
Her historical story begins with seemingly ordinary administrative ambitions: making states legible through censuses, records, identification, statistics, polling, and computational systems. Over time, she argues, the drive for efficiency and prediction helped create the conditions in which people could be categorized, profiled, targeted, and governed as data. The development is therefore not portrayed as an abrupt AI takeover, but as a long shift from counting citizens to managing them through increasingly granular data systems. The book has two broad movements:
MOVEMENT 1: “Government by Machine”
Focuses on political and technological history, tracing the arc from mid-20th century data systems through modern social media and AI. Its core claim is that democratic politics has been systematically reduced toward the automated mining and manipulation of human attention. A few examples I hadn’t previously known about:
🕰️ 1890, U.S. Census & Hollerith Punch Cards: The government needed a faster way to count an exploding population, so it adopted Herman Hollerith’s mechanical punchcard tabulators. This moment represents the pivot point where human identity began to be translated into machine-readable data, birthing the company that would become IBM.
🕰️ 1960, The Simulmatics Corporation: A data company that built a computer simulation of the American electorate for JFK’s presidential campaign. It was the earliest attempt to treat voters as predictable, mechanical data points, serving as the direct ideological grandfather to Facebook and Cambridge Analytica.
🕰️ 1971-73, The Project Cybersyn Experiment (Chile): Salvador Allende’s socialist government attempted to build a centralized, sci-fi-esque computer network to manage the national economy in real-time. It provides a stark historical warning of how even well-meaning political movements fall in love with the illusion of “government by machine.”
MOVEMENT 2: “What Robots Want”
Focuses on sci-fi, exploring its historical warnings and its deep influence on modern technology leaders (like Musk, Altman, Zuckerberg). Its core claim is that Silicon Valley figures routinely treat sci-fi cautionary tales direct technical blueprints, prioritizing speculative future machine apocalypses while building corporate architectures that undermine present-day democratic systems. Her sci-fi references include:
🤖 Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818, Novel)
🤖 Karel Čapek’s R.U.R. / Rossum’s Universal Robots (1920, Play)
🤖 Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We (1921, Novel)
🤖 George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949, Novel)
🤖 Isaac Asimov’s I, Robot (1950, Short Story Collection)
🤖 Don Siegel’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956, Film)
🤖 Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968, Film)
🤖 Philip Kaufman’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978, Film)
🤖 Douglas Adams’s The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1979, Novel)
🤖 James Cameron’s The Terminator (1984, Film)
For Lepore, the stakes are large: civil society, representative institutions, free expression, an informed electorate, equality before the law, and trust in elections can all be weakened when political communication is optimized around engagement and persuasion rather than public reasoning.
A SIMPLE ILLUSTRATION:
⚜️ Under a democratic model, a candidate makes a public argument that can be debated by everyone.
⚜️ Under Lepore’s artificial state model, a campaign or platform can use data to deliver different emotionally calibrated messages to thousands of narrow audiences, test which message produces a desired behavior, and then refine it automatically. The public sphere becomes less shared, less visible, and harder to hold accountable.
LEPORE’S PERSPECTIVE & BIASES: “Bias” here does not necessarily mean factual unreliability; it means the interpretive commitments that determine what she foregrounds and how she weighs the evidence.
SHE IS STRONGLY PRO–LIBERAL DEMOCRACY AND CONSTITUTIONAL SELF-GOVERNMENT. She treats public deliberation, citizenship, representative institutions, and consent as standards against which technologies should be judged. That gives the book moral clarity, but it also means systems that erode those ideals receive little presumption of neutrality. She cites Hannah Arendt’s historical warnings about the connection between totalitarianism and automation, drawing inspiration from Arendt’s focus on how corporate-controlled machinery risks rendering human beings politically superfluous.
SHE IS DEEPLY SKEPTICAL OF CONCENTRATED CORPORATE POWER, ESPECIALLY THE POWER OF PLATFORM AND AI FIRMS. Her framing emphasizes that the systems may appear autonomous but are owned, designed, financed, and directed by identifiable people and companies— figures such as Altman, Zuckerberg, and Musk appear in this account as emblematic actors.
SHE APPROACHES TECHNOLOGY HISTORICALLY AND CULTURALLY RATHER THAN CHIEFLY AS AN ENGINEER, ECONOMIST, OR POLICY ANALYST. Her analysis highlights the stories societies tell about machines (especially sci-fi) and how those stories shape political ambition and elite ideology.
HER STANCE IS PRECAUTIONARY AND OFTEN DELIBERATELY ALARMED. She sees social media, attention-driven platforms, targeted political communication, and AI not as isolated problems but as connected parts of a political order that risks becoming authoritarian, anti-human, and anti-democratic.
SHE FAVORS HUMAN AGENCY OVER TECHNOLOGICAL INEVITABILITY. Although the book is a warning, its title signals that the artificial state is neither natural nor permanent; it is a political construction that can, in principle, be dismantled or redirected.
COMMON CRITICISMS: The most common reservations are about scope, causation, and remedies — not about whether the threats she identifies exist.
⚡ THE CONCEPT MAY BE TOO ELASTIC. A major criticism is that “the artificial state” is asked to explain too much: democratic decline, corporate dominance, ecological damage, alienation, authoritarianism, and AI risk.
⚡ THE TONE CAN FEEL APOCALYPTIC 🧟. Some may find that her diagnosis underplays the differences among technologies, companies, countries, and uses of automation. Critics question whether the book’s overarching dystopian frame makes room for mixed outcomes, institutional resilience, or beneficial uses of digital systems.
⚡ CAUSAL LINKS 🔗 CAN SEEM BROADER THAN THE EVIDENCE 🔬 PRESENTED. The book connects early bureaucratic data practices, 20th century computing, social media, AI, billionaire ideology, and the decline of democracy. That panoramic synthesis is one of its attractions, but it can also make the chain of causation look smoother and more inevitable than historical reality.
⚡ ITS PRESCRIPTIONS ARE COMPARATIVELY THIN 🤏🏼. Hoping that democratic will can dismantle the system seems overly optimistic. Recognizing the problem is easier than specifying enforceable reforms for global platforms, data markets, political advertising, AI infrastructure, and concentrated wealth.
⚡ THE SCI-FI 🛸 LENS MAY BE OVER-EMPHASIZED. Lepore’s reading of techno-elites through their favorite sci-fi is vivid and memorable, but skeptics may see it as more interpretive than demonstrative. Pop culture can certainly shape imagination, but what weight should it be given relative to business incentives, regulation, geopolitical competition, labor markets, and state capacity?
KEY TERMS:
📕 THE ARTIFICIAL STATE: “the rule of humans by machines manufactured by corporations”, creating a structural landscape of “government without consent, even government without humans.”
📕 THE FACTORY FARMING OF HUMANS: “the sorting, segmenting, isolation and management of people by machines” —her explicit phrase for corporate data processing.
📕 ALGORITHMIC MICROTARGETING: “the reduction of politics to the digital manipulation of attention-mining algorithms”, which leaves “nearly every element of American democratic life... vulnerable to subversion.”
BOTTOM LINE
✅ The book is best read as a forceful historical-political indictment, not as a neutral technical survey of AI. Its central insight is that the danger is not machines acting alone: it is the transfer of public power into corporate-owned systems that classify, predict, persuade, and increasingly act on behalf of people.
✅ Its strongest contribution is giving a unifying name to the overlap between platform capitalism, automated governance, political microtargeting, and AI. Its principal weakness is that the concept can become so expansive (and the remedy so general) that it risks describing a powerful moral diagnosis more clearly than a precise causal theory or an implementable program of reform.
Published three weeks ago on 8/25/26, this book currently has a 4.03-star average by 348 GR peeps.
September 25, 2026
Reframing silicon valley freaks as merchant princes is probably the most correct framing I've ever read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 175 reviews