As illustrated by the top comment, it seems that "AI" relies on hype, i.e., careful manipulation of how it is perceived. Its continued existence depends on relentless fund raising because generally no one is going to pay fees to use it long-term

As with so much of Silicon Valley's output the past few decades, "AI" is not something people will pay for. It could be a new form of Trojan Horse for data collection, surveillance and ads, though, adopting a hyperfocus on "growth" at any cost (human, environmental, etc.) but this might not even be necessary^1

Time will tell

In order to raise funds in the absence of any clear business plan, "AI" cannot just be ordinary and useful. It cannot be "autocomplete on steroids". It must be "world-changing"

No one shall underestimate or discount the value of "AI". Overestimation is permitted, however. Speculation is encouraged, but only if it's wild and extreme

1. "AI" is not depending on being brought inside the gates of Troy by the city's inhabitants. It's being placed inside the gates by others. Companies with large numbers of users are installing "AI" on users' computers without the users' consent