But I think the opposite is now starting to happen.
Recently, I received a proposal for building a new website. The offer was good, the price was reasonable, and the person seemed to know what he was doing. But as I read it, I didn’t see a single mention that the website would be built using AI tools. And I immediately had a question: is he really planning to do manually what can now be significantly accelerated with AI? Or is he simply not telling the whole story?
Another example. A friend of mine spent many years doing technical translations. When AI tools appeared, he quickly realized they could help him translate texts much faster. But instead of telling clients honestly, “I can now deliver translations faster while keeping professional editing and quality control,” he decided to use AI quietly. He kept charging as if it were manual translation and deliberately stretched deadlines so it looked like he was still working in the old way.
And what happened? He started losing clients. Because companies no longer need slow “manual” translation if quality work can be delivered faster.
Professionals used to think that admitting they use AI would devalue their expertise. Now it is starting to work the other way around. If a specialist says nothing about AI at all, they no longer look more solid. They look either behind the times or not fully transparent.
Take lawyers, for example. I’m sure many already use generative AI, but are afraid to say so openly to clients. And that’s a mistake. The strong position today is not: “No, no, we do everything manually, just like twenty years ago.” The strong position is: “Yes, we use AI. Moreover, we have configured our systems for local legislation, court practice, real cases, professional databases, and the specifics of this jurisdiction.” Obviously, such a statement does not reduce trust in a lawyer. It increases it. Because we see a professional who has strengthened his expertise with a serious tool.
The same applies to doctors. Imagine we come to a doctor and realize that they do not use modern AI tools at all, do not know how to work with them, and are not even interested in them. Questions arise. Of course, we don’t want a machine to diagnose us. But if a doctor uses AI as an additional tool for checking symptoms, analyzing cases, finding rare patterns, and reviewing new research, that is a plus, not a minus. A patient with AI and a doctor with AI are two very different realities. We can ask AI about our symptoms and get an illusion of understanding. A doctor can use AI as a professional tool while remaining responsible for the decision.
As long as a specialist hides the use of AI, they are almost trying to prove to the client: “I am better than the machine.” But that is a weak position. It is much stronger to say: “Yes, I use AI. But I am responsible for the result. For the logic, the quality, the nuances, and the final decision.” Then the specialist is no longer competing with the machine. They are competing with other people — through their thinking, experience, taste, responsibility, speed, and depth.
AI itself does not make a person smarter. It amplifies what is already there. For a deep specialist, it gives scale, speed, and additional precision. For a superficial person, it helps produce superficial answers faster.
And I think these are exactly the kinds of specialists we will increasingly choose in the coming years.
📱 Mykola Latansky. Subscribe!
Leave a reply