The Growing Reality: OpenAI Has Become Untouchable by Design
The integral position of AI in professional workflows makes dismantling these monopolies far more complex than previous tech giants. The time to develop decentralized alternatives is running out.
Opinion by: Scott Stuart, founder at Kava Labs
In November 2025, leadership at OpenAI suggested a potential collaboration with the federal government that bore striking resemblance to a financial rescue package. Following substantial public outcry, they retracted the suggestion. However, this exploratory proposition simply confirmed what was already common knowledge but remained largely unspoken: The dominant players in artificial intelligence have already achieved "too big to fail" status.
The United States government demonstrated this reality in 2024. Following years of antitrust litigation against Google, federal authorities obtained a ruling declaring the company had maintained an unlawful monopoly, yet final corrective measures remain pending, underscoring the sluggish and unpredictable nature of antitrust actions.
There was no forced sale of Chrome. No dismantling of the advertising empire. A corporation that dedicated two decades to solidifying its monopolistic position emerged with minimal consequences.
An identical scenario is unfolding in the artificial intelligence sector today. This time around, the technology has become far too critical to economic infrastructure to address down the road.
The regret cycle is predictable
An innovative technology appears on the scene. Numerous competitors engage in a battle for market leadership. Network effects combined with capital advantages establish a definitive victor. Everyone gravitates toward the leader because it makes logical sense. Top-tier talent joins their ranks, the largest capital investments flow in their direction and technological progress accelerates most rapidly within their walls.
A decade passes, and the realization of what has occurred brings widespread alarm, but it's already beyond repair. Facebook transformed attention into a weapon and divided democratic societies. Google established a surveillance-based advertising behemoth with authority over internet standards deployed across billions of devices worldwide.
Once the severity of the issue became apparent, the costs of switching providers had become prohibitive and legal interventions proved ineffective. Artificial intelligence is now in its fourth year following this identical trajectory. ChatGPT made its debut in November 2022. The phase where "everyone gravitates toward the leader" has already commenced.
AI consolidation is even more dangerous
Monopolistic control over social media platforms was harmful. These platforms manipulated electoral processes, inflicted damage on mental wellness and constructed echo chambers. At minimum, users retained the option to remove Facebook from their lives.
Monopolistic control over web browsers represented a greater threat. Chrome's market dominance granted Google authority over internet standards, though users could still migrate to Firefox or Brave; the fundamental architecture of the web remained decentralized. Artificial intelligence infrastructure offers neither of these escape routes.
This isn't simply an application that can be uninstalled or a browsing environment that can be substituted. It represents the foundational layer determining how professional work gets accomplished, how software gets developed and how determinations get reached. Once electronic mail, data analysis, customer support, legal investigation and healthcare diagnosis all operate through models under the control of a handful of corporations, the dependency isn't tied to a single application. It becomes embedded in the infrastructure itself.
Demand for alternatives exists, but the window is closing
The opposing viewpoint suggests that consumers don't genuinely desire to be constrained, pointing to privacy-focused alternatives as evidence. Brave attracts 100 million monthly users who selected a browser that refrains from collecting their personal information. Signal boasts 100 million users who prioritized encrypted communication over WhatsApp's ease of use. Linux powers 96% of the world's servers because institutions prioritize security above convenience. DuckDuckGo handles 3 billion search queries monthly from individuals who have rejected Google's tracking practices.
Decentralized AI platforms have drawn hundreds of thousands of users despite operating with essentially no marketing expenditure and providing reduced convenience compared to ChatGPT.
These individuals aren't ideological extremists. They represent professionals seeking identical functionality without contributing proprietary information into systems that simultaneously train their business rivals.
The critical question facing us is whether the supply side can expand sufficiently before identical network effects render alternatives meaningless. Brave entered the market eight years after Chrome, requiring nearly 10 years to accumulate 100 million users. Signal appeared five years after WhatsApp and continues to represent only a small fraction of WhatsApp's 3 billion users. Both cases illustrate that consumer demand for options genuinely exists, and that recovering market position can require multiple decades once monopolistic control has been established.
The stakes are permanent
OpenAI's public statements served as an urgent warning, reminding everyone that the distinction between social media monopolies and AI monopolies carries existential implications. Facebook manipulated content feeds; AI will serve as the intermediary for how humans perceive reality itself. Google monetized search behavior; AI will possess the capability to accurately forecast decisions before individuals consciously make them.
Dismantling Facebook or Google presented political challenges. Fragmenting an AGI monopoly will prove technically unfeasible. Worldwide AI infrastructure investment hit $1.5 trillion in 2025 and is forecasted to grow by an additional $500 billion next year, according to Gartner.
This entire capital allocation is concentrated among three cloud service providers and a single semiconductor manufacturer. In contrast, decentralized alternatives secured $436 million in 2024, representing a comparatively modest sum. The opportunity to construct parallel infrastructure exists today, not five years from now when OpenAI commands 4 billion users and maintains enterprise agreements with every Fortune 500 company.
Critics will counter that decentralized AI cannot compete with centralized performance levels, that coordination expenses are excessive and that market forces have already determined the winners. That's precisely what skeptics proclaimed about Linux in 1998, Bitcoin in 2012 and encrypted messaging in 2015. The historical pattern remains consistent; alternative solutions appear impractical right up until they become indispensable.
The Facebook error was damaging. The Google error was more severe. The AI error will prove irreversible. The sole remaining question is whether decisive action materializes before this rapidly narrowing window of opportunity closes permanently.
Opinion by: Scott Stuart, founder at Kava Labs.