Microsoft Research is at it again:
Advait Sarkar, a Microsoft Research employee got a paper published at the CHI Conference on Human Factors in computing systems:
"AI Could Have Written This: Birth of a Classist Slur in Knowledge Work"
dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3706599…
Now I am all for calling out structures and language of oppression and discrimination but this is really something special. "AI shaming arises from class anxiety in middle class knowledge workers" ... yeah no. It's about shaming people (usually from the middle or upper class) who don't want to put in actual work but get credit for having done it.
Like what is the argument: Lower class people can only compete while using AI and therefore should not be shamed? What kind of a view on lower class people does Mr. Microsoft Research communicate here?
teilten dies erneut
climbertobby
Als Antwort auf tante • • •tante
Als Antwort auf climbertobby • • •Olivier Leroy
Als Antwort auf tante • • •climbertobby
Als Antwort auf Olivier Leroy • • •tante
Als Antwort auf climbertobby • • •- YouTube
www.youtube.comOlivier Leroy
Als Antwort auf tante • • •Vogelgesang
Als Antwort auf Olivier Leroy • • •@defuneste @climbertobby
The paper is on the author's website.
Reading it gives you a strange feeling of being affected by something like reverse gaslighting.
I think this is due to the fact that it uses several conceptual double binds (like making a moral argument while at the same time decrying codes of ethics of AI use as "moralisation") and completely ignores the economy of AI proliferation.
In the paper, the technology is simply just there. Enormous investment of capital and corporate landgrab play no role whatsoever while discussing "classism".
The only time they get vaguely hinted at is when towards the end possible disenfranchisment is dismissed with the claim that there will supposedly soon be a perfect market where producers have little power anyway.
Olivier Leroy
Als Antwort auf Vogelgesang • • •@foyglgezang @climbertobby
In french I would say "kamoulox" but woah, this was published????
Let me ignore any kind of art theories, let me ignore any kind of materialism (But I will still say "Marx") because "these arguments cloak a deeper underlying motivation for
shaming, of which may the shamer may not even be conscious."
We are so lucky to have the author and the revealation! I will need to calm done after the use of Foucault. ....
Vogelgesang
Als Antwort auf Olivier Leroy • • •@defuneste @climbertobby Well "published"... There are hundreds of papers / extended abstracts in the proceedings of this conference, and Microsoft was one of the sponsors.
My favorite part is when the author recalls having read a paper about "delve" being a marker for AI use and gives the associated "culture of shame" the name of a biblical god that demands child sacrifice.
tante
Als Antwort auf Vogelgesang • • •Alarith Uhde
Als Antwort auf tante • • •Vogelgesang
Als Antwort auf tante • • •The paper was in the alt.chi track which is meant for contributions that are "controversial" and would likely not get accepted in the regular paper review process. chi2025.acm.org/for-authors/al…
Submission requires you to also hand in a presentation video, I think that's the one on YouTube. Means it was maybe not recorded in a presentation at the conference proper, but rather beforehand by the author? [Edited:] Might also have the audio track from a live presentation there, I am not sure - I think you are right, it was likely presented.
Anyway there was a selection and review process. Since the submissions are not anonymous I think it is reasonable to expect a certain bias towards accepting at least some submissions by authors affiliated with a major sponsor.
CHI 2025 Yokohama, Japan
CHI 2025bobschi
Als Antwort auf tante • • •climbertobby
Als Antwort auf tante • • •@defuneste The more I listen to this, the more this seems like AI-hype bullshit with the false promise, that using AI can provide upward class mobility.
Also the term "boundary work" is used with plenty of liberty if not just wrong.
Also I bet that guy would interpret Marx as saying Capitalists act immorally.
AI shaming is sexism against men, sure mydude, sure 🤡
tante
Als Antwort auf tante • • •not exactly rigorous I'd say
youtube.com/watch?v=Rir-HoYJNY… )
- YouTube
www.youtube.comOctorine
Als Antwort auf tante • • •I haven't read the paper but I've heard the classism/AI hate argument before and it usually goes like this:
Rich people are more likely to get their papers accepted, not because the content is better, but because they went to good schools so the way they express themselves is different, and editors and reviewers pick up on that.
AI is good at mimicking that writing style, so
poor people can now sneak into the club by running their paper through AI to poshify it. Hence the sneering.
Z̈oé ⛵
Als Antwort auf tante • • •Oriel Jutty
Als Antwort auf tante • • •dragonfrog
Als Antwort auf tante • • •there is an actual argument for this, or at least there was (AI writing characteristics may have changed since so I don't know how much it still applies).
Basically since LLM AI was heavily trained by underpaid workers in India and Nigeria among other countries, some of the "tells" of AI writing were actually Indianisms and Nigerianisms. Which meant that when Indian and Nigerian people wrote naturally they were more likely to be falsely accused of getting AI to write for them.
Caroline
Als Antwort auf tante • • •90% hit rate → Quarterly profit exceeds 60%
💣 MSFT/GOOG targets tonight
🗺️ 100 maps available
🔗chat.whatsapp.com/F618WpgwKN7L… 👈
🏦US stock magnifying glass🔎
WhatsApp.comPhosphenes
Als Antwort auf tante • • •I don't know what you are saying here.
'shaming people (usually from the middle or upper class) who don't want to put in actual work but get credit for having done it.'
So you are critical of people who use AI and take credit for it? Or critical of managers who use employee work and take credit for it?
'Lower class people can only compete while using AI and therefore should not be shamed?'
Are you suggesting that we *should* shame lower class people who use AI?
🤔
tante
Als Antwort auf Phosphenes • • •Wendy M. Grossman
Als Antwort auf tante • • •L⁂Rhodes
Als Antwort auf tante • • •tante
Als Antwort auf L⁂Rhodes • • •I don't think it's a planned thing by MS though. Just some boot licking.
Malte Engeler
Als Antwort auf tante • • •tante
Als Antwort auf Malte Engeler • • •2xfo
Als Antwort auf tante • • •Is he birthing the classist slur on purpose?
CausticMango
Als Antwort auf tante • • •This is pure, unadulterated horse shit. I’ve heard this same foolishness many times before from AI boosters.
“Criticizing someone for using AI is just a gatekeeping; you’re trying to protect your ‘privileged status’ as a developer/artist/etc.”
🇨🇦🇩🇪🇨🇳张殿李🇨🇳🇩🇪🇨🇦
Als Antwort auf tante • • •I have come to the point of automatically deciding that anybody shilling LLMbeciles is either a complete and absolute moron, or an ethics-free sociopath.
There's a lot of both of those out there it turns out.
David Phd
Als Antwort auf tante • • •Yes its an Alt-CHI track paper which are meant to be provocative, and no, Sponsors do not get preferential treatment in acceptances
David England, CHI participant since 1987