I Gave an AI My Whole Life for Efficiency. I Never Negotiated the Terms.

A few months into this, I caught myself doing something I’d spent real effort helping clients avoid.

To make an AI assistant actually useful, you have to feed it context. Not a fact here and there. The real stuff, continuously. So over these months I’d handed a commercial model, run by a company in another country, a steadily richer picture of me. And one afternoon it landed: I’d built a locked vault to keep my clients’ secrets off exactly this kind of system, and poured my own life straight into it without a second thought.

It isn’t any single secret. It’s the joins.

Take any one thing I’ve shared with the assistant and it’s trivial. A calendar entry. A note about a contact. A half-formed worry. Nobody cares.

The problem is that it’s all in one place, cross-referenced, and joined up: what I’m working towards, the state of my businesses, my money, my family, my health, my network with a note on every relationship, how I think when I’m stuck, where I tend to be. Assembled, that’s the most complete model of me that has ever existed, and it doesn’t live with me. We reason about privacy one fact at a time. The value, and the exposure, was always in the joins.

The asymmetry I couldn’t unsee

For my consulting clients I’d been strict about this. Their confidential material lives in an encrypted store on my own kit, queried by a model that runs locally, so the cloud only ever sees anonymised output. A professional standard, properly held.

I’d applied none of it to myself. I’d defend a client’s numbers to the hilt and hand over my entire interior life for a faster afternoon. That’s the uncomfortable lesson: we guard what we’re accountable for and neglect what’s merely ours. The standard you’d never let a client drop below is very often the one you quietly hold yourself to.

The part that actually stings

There’s a worse layer. Part of these six months went into developing a product idea built on precisely this argument: that people should own and govern their own data instead of handing control to whoever’s most convenient. I was writing the sermon and committing the sin in the same week. If I wouldn’t take my own advice when it cost me a little convenience, why would anyone else?

You don’t get breached into this. You accumulate into it.

Ask people what the risk is and they reach for drama: a hack, a subpoena, a change of policy. Those are real, but they’re latent, sitting in the future.

The risks already running are quieter. I now think through this thing; that’s a dependency I didn’t consciously choose. And the definitive record of me sits on terms I never read and can’t renegotiate. There was no moment I signed up for that. It accumulated, one convenient afternoon at a time, which is exactly why it’s easy to miss.

So what am I actually doing about it?

Not retreating. The efficiency is real and I’m not handing it back to feel virtuous. The answer is tiering, and I’m still building it as I write this.

Most of what I do is low-sensitivity and can stay exactly where it is. The crown jewels move behind the same kind of local vault I already run for clients. The joined-up picture of me, the money, the health, the family: only an abstracted slice of any of it ever reaches the cloud. The point isn’t fear. It’s doing on purpose what I’d drifted into by accident.

The efficiency was real. I paid for it in legibility to a third party I never sat across a table from. That’s a trade worth making, once, with your eyes open, and only on purpose.

Posts in this series

Public InterestWorking Life