Sponsored by
The Pew Research Center published its annual AI survey this month. 5,119 US adults, conducted February 2026.
The headline number the industry is not repeating: 16% of Americans believe AI will have a positive impact on society over the next 20 years. 40% say negative. 63% think it is advancing too fast.
The headline number the industry is repeating: 49% of American adults now use AI chatbots, up from 33% in 2024.
Both numbers are true. That is the story.
The generation that knows best hates it most
The most striking finding in the Pew data is the age breakdown.
Gen Z adults, 18 to 29, are the heaviest users of AI at 66% adoption. They are also the most hostile to it. 48% believe it will have a negative impact on society, higher than any other age group.
The 30 to 49 bracket and the 50 plus bracket land at 39% and 37% negative respectively. The people who have used AI least are the most ambivalent. The people who have used it most are the most hostile.
This is not a pattern that more marketing can fix. Familiarity with the product is producing the skepticism, not ignorance of it.
The most trustworthy AI admin agent for busy executives.
Busy executive. Packed calendar. An inbox that never empties.
Everyone is talking about AI agents. Every week brings another promise of an assistant that can do it all.
Catch is the real deal.
A smart, proactive AI admin agent focused solely on taking administrative work off your plate.
It schedules meetings, triages your inbox, drafts emails in your voice, resolves conflicts, sends follow-ups, and handles the countless small tasks that consume your day.
Available wherever you work — Gmail, Outlook, Slack, WhatsApp, and even over the phone.
No setup. No training. No learning curve.
Catch learns how you work, takes action when it's confident, and keeps things moving without constant supervision.
From swamped to sorted in seconds.
Get started with Catch and have your assistant ready before your next meeting.
Coerced adoption is not organic demand
The Pew numbers capture something the industry's usage metrics do not: much of this adoption is not voluntary.
AI has been embedded into tools people already depend on. Search engines. Email clients. Workplace software. According to previous Pew surveys, roughly one in five US workers now uses AI at their jobs, with managers consistently more enthusiastic than the people doing the work.
People are using AI because it is there, and because not using it carries professional risk. That is a different thing from people choosing it.
An industry built on coerced adoption has a structural problem. The 71% of Americans who believe AI will make their personal information less secure are looking at the actual record and drawing the only rational conclusion available.
What the record shows
The Pew data does not exist in isolation. It sits alongside a documented pattern.
Microsoft's aggressive embedding of Copilot into its product suite produced a user backlash sharp enough that "Microslop" trended across social media in January 2026. Microsoft eventually began quietly removing Copilot branding from apps and renaming AI features as "advanced features." The same product, a different label.
Meta replaced Instagram's search bar with an AI chatbot. Users wanted to search for people and hashtags. The Nielsen Norman Group documented the confusion directly: people expected a search bar to function as a search bar. Meta reversed the change.
Google's AI Overviews, deployed into the world's most used search engine, produced factually wrong answers at scale. The answers went to millions of people before corrections were possible.
The Commonwealth Bank of Australia replaced 45 customer service employees with an AI voice system. The system failed. Call volume increased. The bank apologized and offered the employees their jobs back.
Each of these is a separate incident. Together they describe a consistent pattern: deployment before readiness, at scale, into products people depend on, followed by reversal once the consequences became public.
Meet America’s Newest $1B Unicorn
It just surpassed a $1B valuation, joining private US companies like SpaceX and OpenAI. Unlike them, you can invest in EnergyX today. General Motors already has. Why? EnergyX’s tech can recover up to 3X more lithium than traditional methods. Now, they hold rights to ~13M tons of lithium across North and South America. Invest in EnergyX at $13/share by 7/16.
Energy Exploration Technologies, Inc. (“EnergyX”) has engaged Beehiiv to publish this communication in connection with EnergyX’s ongoing Regulation A offering. Beehiiv has been paid in cash and may receive additional compensation. Beehiiv and/or its affiliates do not currently hold securities of EnergyX.
This compensation and any current or future ownership interest could create a conflict of interest. Please consider this disclosure alongside EnergyX’s offering materials. EnergyX’s Regulation A offering has been qualified by the SEC. Offers and sales may be made only by means of the qualified offering circular. Before investing, carefully review the offering circular, including the risk factors. The offering circular is available at invest.energyx.com/.
Comparisons to other companies are for informational purposes only and should not imply similar results. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Market shortfall are forward‑looking estimates and are subject to substantial uncertainty.
The political hedge
The industry's response to declining public trust has not been to slow deployment or address the documented failures. According to the Los Angeles Times, political finance groups linked to AI companies including OpenAI and Anthropic have distributed a combined $37 million on 2026 midterm election campaigns, with the figure expected to grow significantly before November.
The spending does not pick sides. OpenAI-linked groups have directed funds to both Republican and Democratic campaigns. Anthropic-linked groups have done the same.
The operating logic is straightforward: if regulatory risk is the threat, buying access to both sides of the legislature removes the threat regardless of which side wins.
A grassroots Republican incumbent in Montana was eliminated in his primary after a super PAC affiliated with an OpenAI co-founder spent close to $900,000 backing his opponent. He told the Times he had no way to compete with that level of spending.
What the numbers are actually measuring
The 40% of Americans who believe AI will be negative for society are not making a statement about the technology. They are making a statement about the people deploying it.
The Pew data is consistent with what you would expect when a powerful technology is introduced without adequate safeguards, at a pace driven by capital competition rather than readiness, into systems that affect billions of people, by companies with demonstrated willingness to spend heavily on political protection rather than address documented harms.
The trust deficit is not a communication problem. It is a track record problem.
For builders developing AI-powered products and services, the Pew data points to a real market gap: the 84% of Americans who do not believe AI will be good for society still use tools and services every day. The products that close the gap between usage and trust, that are transparent about what they do and do not do, that do not embed AI where it was not asked for, will operate in a different competitive environment than the ones that follow the current industry pattern.
404 Found covers AI developments from a European Insider, three times a week.
10x the context. Half the time.
Speak your prompts into ChatGPT or Claude and get detailed, paste-ready input that actually gives you useful output. Wispr Flow captures what you'd cut when typing. Free on Mac, Windows, and iPhone.