A growing online subculture is built around the idea of “maxxing” productivity with AI - using software to automate work, daily tasks and even leisure in the hope of becoming richer, more efficient and more admired in mostly male online communities. It overlaps with hustle-focused social media, crypto speculation and extreme self-optimisation trends where the self is treated like a project to be constantly upgraded and where life starts to look like a performance for an audience rather than something to be lived offline.
Into this space has stepped a cottage industry of AI course sellers and influencers, many with little formal background who promise “genius” ways to make money from home or run hands-off AI-powered businesses. Their offers range from repackaging other people’s content for ad revenue to AI-driven outreach and consulting and are heavily marketed to people already worried about rising costs, job insecurity and the fear of being left behind by rapid technological change. Social platforms and recommendation feeds amplify these messages, nudging users toward a narrow stream of success stories and curated lifestyles that seem just out of reach.
The business model behind many of these programs leans on familiar psychological levers. While reputable AI certificates from major tech firms can cost under $100, some influencer-led “AI business” courses run from a couple of thousand dollars to around $10,000 with extra fees for ongoing “mentorship”. Buyers often justify the expense through the Veblen effect, assuming a higher price means higher value, and through the sunk-cost fallacy, feeling compelled to defend or keep investing in a program once they have paid heavily for it. Online reviews can be sharply split, with some participants reporting strong results and others discovering the content barely goes beyond what is freely available in public videos, which makes it difficult for outsiders to judge which stories reflect the typical experience.
Behind the hype, employers’ expectations add another layer of pressure. Organisations increasingly want staff who can use AI tools effectively but also responsibly, especially in regulated sectors where careless use could lead to public or legal trouble. Many large firms now run their own structured AI training, issuing internal badges or credentials that focus on risk management, trustworthy AI use and data governance. In this environment, flashy unaccredited “level 10 AI guru” claims from social media are likely to carry less weight than clear plain-language descriptions of what someone can actually do with AI and how they manage its risks.
The bigger picture looks like a clash between two visions of AI, one that treats it as a cheat code for easy money and another that sees it as a tool to sharpen judgement and augment decision-making. The crucial question for anyone tempted by AI-maxxing is whether their efforts genuinely strengthen critical thinking and core skills or just produce more low-value content, more noise and more financial stress. As the technology becomes widely accessible, the real differentiator seems to be human judgement, knowing when AI adds value, when it does not and when the promise of a shortcut is simply too expensive to test.
