As Citrini's AI report spooks investors, here's what experts say about 'doomsday porn'

• Citrini Research AI study sparks fears of a dystopian future.
• Experts call the report fear-mongering and flawed.
• Many argue AI will create new jobs and desires, not just losses.

Did our AI summary help?

The viral Citrini Research scenario study has opened a Pandora's box. Deep anxieties about a future powered entirely by artificial intelligence have come to the surface, with some experts terming the report "doomsday porn." So, will 2028 turn the world into the dystopian society we've seen in sepia-tinted, murky movies? Is an AI apocalypse a reality? Well, the research paper almost suggests so. However, many AI futurists and tech experts have slammed the study as unnecessary fear-mongering.

"We are certain some of these scenarios won't materialise. We're equally certain that machine intelligence will continue to accelerate. The premium on human intelligence will narrow," the report says toward the end. While calling it a "fun read," American investor Marcelo P. Lima has said that the report has its share of flaws.

Citrini’s piece is a fun read but has some major flaws.

I’ll go over a few of them: lump of labor fallacy, ignoring the cost of living, capex fallacy, and wrong on SaaS. The overarching problem in the piece is the so-called “Horse Fallacy.” When the tractor and car were… pic.twitter.com/jqFnR78jWc — Marcelo P. Lima (@MarceloLima) February 23, 2026

Referring to the "horse fallacy," Lima says, "The lump of labor fallacy assumes that humans have a fixed checklist of problems to solve. But every time technology checks an item off the list, we invent another desire. Human desires are infinite. Maybe if AI does all the work here on Earth, we'll terraform Mars, build O'Neill cylinders, and Dyson spheres. We'll certainly not sit idle, desiring nothing more.

He is not alone. Capital Mind founder Deepak Shenoy has said, "Doomsday porn is addictive. The AI-based end of everything is the WWF of the world now - fun to watch but mostly fake. Maybe the money is in the show, not the story they tell you."

This is the viral post that currently spooks everyone In 2008, we were told that oil reserves would only last a few years like this guardian piece:https://t.co/QBKnIhSoe8 Even if you bought that argument and bet on solar, wind and what not, the truth is that oil companies… https://t.co/47TDxwAq3v — Deepak Shenoy (@deepakshenoy) February 24, 2026

Then there are those such as Justin Abrams and Dan Hockenmaier who believe the report is simply wrong. "This piece shows a profound lack of understanding of how marketplaces work and why they are defensible. 'A competent developer could deploy a functional competitor in weeks, and dozens did, enticing drivers away from DoorDash and Uber Eats by passing 90-95% of the delivery fee through to the driver.' Anyone could have done that at any time in the last ten years. Why was no one able to? Because the hard part has nothing to do with building the app or attracting drivers. The hard part is building a liquid marketplace with all of the best supply and a massive series of optimisations and investments to drive down prices and delivery times while driving up reliability and quality," says Hockenmaier, Chief Strategy Officer at Faire.

This piece shows a profound lack of understanding of how marketplaces work and why they are defensible. “A competent developer could deploy a functional competitor in weeks, and dozens did, enticing drivers away from DoorDash and Uber Eats by passing 90-95% of the delivery fee… https://t.co/BBq0cDuBmh

— Dan Hockenmaier (@danhockenmaier) February 23, 2026

I think the Citrini report is definitely wrong and I could argue it ad nauseum But the one thing I’ll say it changed my mind on is DoorDash being safe I don’t think a random company will come in and eat market share but there’s low friction to have Toast come in https://t.co/HNozJfOpPg — Justin Abrams (@justin_abrams1) February 24, 2026

Similarly, ace consultant Abrams feels, "I think the Citrini report is definitely wrong, and I could argue it ad nauseam. But the one thing I'll say is that it changed my mind about DoorDash being safe. I don't think a random company will come in and eat market share, but there's low friction for Toast to come in."