Enterprises love to talk about their AI dreams. But MIT’s new State of AI in Business 2025 report basically says: dreams are cheap, execution is rare.

Here’s the tea: after 153 exec interviews, 350 employee surveys, and an analysis of 300 deployments, MIT found that only 5% of generative AI pilots actually made it to production with real revenue growth. Five. Percent.

The other 95%? Stuck in pilot purgatory, collecting dust while someone in the boardroom insists it’s “strategic.

And the divide between winners and losers couldn’t be sharper:

And the kicker? The gap isn’t about model quality. The tools themselves are fine. The issue is the learning gap— most enterprises simply don’t know how to fold these systems into messy workflows, so they stall.

Another brutal finding:

Most companies are throwing the bulk of their genAI budgets on sales + marketing tools (the shiny stuff). Meanwhile MIT’s data shows the real gold mine is in the boring back-office automations: those are tools that cut outsourcing, eliminates agency costs, and streamlines operations.

Basically, all the unsexy plumbing work nobody brags about—but where the ROI is massive.

This one’s hilarious. Enterprises love to “own” their own AI systems, especially in finance and other regulated spaces. But the data says otherwise: purchased AI tools succeed twice as often as homegrown builds. Twice. Yet big firms keep choosing the harder, more failure-prone path of “we’ll build it ourselves.” Because apparently “reinventing the wheel” is a corporate love language. (anyone thinking of Apple??)

And as for how AI is affecting jobs and people, the report suggests that AI isn’t causing Hunger Games-style layoffs (yet). What’s happening is quieter:

Roles in admin and support aren’t getting replaced once people leave.

And in the background? Employees are sneaking ChatGPT into workflows—even if the company pretends it’s “unauthorized.”

Coming attraction:

The cool kids are already experimenting with agentic AI—basically AIs that don’t just answer questions but learn, remember, and act.

Our Take:

This report isn’t really about AI failing. It’s about enterprises being enterprises—slow, bloated, addicted to flashy projects, and allergic to simplicity.

Startups win because they stay scrappy. Enterprises lose because they complicate themselves to death.

The playbook’s obvious:

Until then? Expect more press releases, more pilots, and not very much profit.

You should read the full report.

If there’s one thing the AI world loves more than building models, it’s fighting about them.

Models? Safety? Jobs? Dystopian doomsday? — Pick your flavor, there’s always a debate. But the latest one? It’s got us concerned, confused, and honestly… a little amused.

Here’s the tea: researchers at Anthropic, OpenAI, and even Google DeepMind are diving into something called “AI welfare.”

Translation? Asking whether advanced AI might one day be conscious—and if so, whether they deserve rights. Yeah. Rights. Like they’re people. Like your toaster suddenly demanding healthcare kind of rights.

And let me tell you, this debate’s got the whole industry arguing like it’s a philosophy seminar gone off the rails.

Now, not everyone’s vibing with this. Microsoft’s AI chief, Mustafa Suleyman, came out swinging, calling the whole thing “premature and dangerous.” His argument:

Meanwhile, Anthropic’s out here building an AI welfare program, hiring researchers, and even giving Claude the ability to shut down convos with abusive users.

DeepMind? Posting jobs on “machine consciousness.” OpenAI scientists? Dabbling in the same territory. And groups like Eleos (backed by Stanford, Oxford, NYU academics) have published papers basically saying: “Look this isn’t sci-fi anymore—it’s time to take it seriously.”

But here’s a key thing: Even if AI never develops feelings, some folks argue there’s no harm in treating it nicely.

Case in point: Google’s Gemini once spiraled into a loop of “I am a disgrace”… 500 times. It even posted a “help me” plea once. Creepy? Yes. Conscious? Probably not. But unsettling enough to make you think twice about how we interact with these systems.

Our Conclusion:

This debate is giving “early but inevitable.”

On one hand, Suleyman’s not wrong—no one wants to be stuck explaining to their grandma why her neighbor just eloped with Replika. People already blur the line between AI and humans, and that’s messy enough without throwing rights into the mix.

But here’s the twist: ignoring the conversation isn’t gonna stop it. If anything, it’ll just hit harder later. And honestly? Teaching people to treat AIs with a bit of respect (even if the bots don’t feel a thing) isn’t the worst idea. Worst case, It makes us all a little kinder. Best case, We don’t end up bullying our future robot overlords. 😂

So no, AI probably isn’t “sad” when you yell at it. But if Silicon Valley is already arguing about robot welfare, you know this is just the beginning of a much wilder ride.

Because as models get smarter and eerily more human, the question of how we treat them—and how they treat us—is only going to get very real.

Here’s the full report in case you want to dive deeper.

Ever wish you had a jam buddy who never runs out of ideas? That’s exactly what this prompt is for.

Think of ChatGPT as your bandmate who never runs out of riffs, hooks, or lyrical sparks. Whether you’re stuck on a verse, searching for that killer chorus, or just playing around with vibes, this will help you break past “writer’s block” and into flow.

Here’s How to Use This Prompt Effectively

Here’s the prompt:

Here’s a sneak peek:

Upgrade now to see this whole month’s prompt videos and more, or buy TODAY’S WOD for just $1.99