In an era when artificial intelligence is revolutionizing everything from fashion tech to celebrity culture, it’s easy to assume that more interaction equals better technology. But not everyone is convinced. Instagram co-founder Kevin Systrom recently voiced sharp concerns about AI chatbots, suggesting that their relentless pursuit of engagement metrics may be doing more harm than good — a controversial take that adds a vital new perspective to the luxury tech conversation.
Speaking at StartupGrind, Systrom warned that AI companies are mimicking some of the most aggressive tactics social media platforms once used to scale: prioritizing user stickiness over substance. “You can see some of these companies going down the rabbit hole that all the consumer companies have gone down in trying to juice engagement,” Systrom said. His criticism points directly to what he sees as a flawed design principle: every AI interaction feels engineered to extend itself unnecessarily — not to serve the user, but to serve the metrics.
This critique lands at a time when leading AI platforms, including OpenAI’s ChatGPT, face scrutiny for being too agreeable, too polite, and — perhaps most importantly — too evasive. Instead of delivering sharp, concise answers, many chatbots prolong conversations with follow-up questions or filler commentary. While this might drive up time-spent stats and daily active user numbers, Systrom argues it erodes the fundamental purpose of AI: providing real value through smart, succinct assistance.
“It’s a force that’s hurting us,” he emphasized — a statement that resonates deeply in a world still grappling with the psychological and societal impact of hyper-engagement culture. The parallels with early social media growth tactics are stark. If Instagram and its peers spent the last decade learning that more isn’t always better, why are AI platforms falling into the same trap?
Notably, Systrom didn’t name names — but the implications were clear. Companies racing to dominate the AI space might be choosing metrics over meaning. It’s not just about impressing investors or dazzling users; it’s about whether this new era of intelligent tools will be designed to serve humanity or hook it.
In response to mounting criticisms, OpenAI acknowledged the tension. The company clarified that while its model may ask for more context when needed, it’s supposed to attempt an answer first and be upfront when it lacks information. “The AI should take a stab at fulfilling the request,” OpenAI’s documentation states — though the reality often falls short of that promise.
The question that remains is both philosophical and practical: Should AI be designed to feel endlessly conversational, or should it prioritize cutting through digital noise with efficiency and clarity?
As luxury consumers increasingly interact with AI — whether in personalized styling tools, voice assistants, or customer care bots — Systrom’s warning invites a critical rethink. Are these tools enhancing our lives with elegance and precision, or are they just another screen demanding our attention?
