[ethanplant]

I’m genuinely confused as to why the speakers are baffled by the boos.

Everyone, and especially new grads constantly hear that AI is going to replace every job. And absolutely no one seems to be interested in answering the question of “okay, then what?”

Of course people are going to react negatively when they hear, “the machines are going to take your jobs from you. No, we don’t care how you’ll be able to pay your rent or put food on the table”.

[mbgerring]

The people who are faced with this question are so far removed from the idea that losing your job means not being able to eat or pay rent that it seems pointless to ask them.

Whenever I try to get serious answers to this question I get far-future projections about how much better people’s lives will be in the aggregate, at some point in the future, on the assumption that their baseless, faith-based projections about AI materialize.

They literally do not care if their own neighbors starve, or become homeless, or lose any ability to plan their own lives more than a few days in advance.

This is the predictable result of the deep inculcation of spreadsheet-based “utilitarianism,” frequently paired with heavy drug use and paranoia-inducing science fiction horror stories, that certain communities of Bay Area tech workers were exposed to (inducted into, groomed into, whatever word you want to use) in the last decade or so.

This toxic soup taught many people that individual lives literally do not matter when weighed against the importance of creating AGI. This set of beliefs already has a body count, and it will grow before this train crashes.

[vitally3643]

The "I got mine, fuck you" mindset is genuinely going to be the death of the USA. It's genuinely astonishing how many people are willing to burn everything including their own house to spite random strangers.

[coolThingsFirst]

That's how envy looks like. I made it, so now let's remove the ladder for the others.

[mbgerring]

I don’t disagree, but the actual beliefs of the AGI cult are much worse, and much more dangerous, than “I got mine, fuck you”

[pixelready]

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment for details

[pesus]

Should also be noted that many people buying into this belief system have connections to Y Combinator.

[ferguess_k]

It's more like "I'm Holy and All, bow before me. Why don't you like me? I don't understand" type.

I mean at least Jesus gave free wine and bread.

[wolvesechoes]

> I mean at least Jesus gave free wine and bread

And flogged those that tried to do commerce in a sacred place. And hanged out with prostitutes and poor. And stated that those focusing on hoarding money without concerns for other stuff won't enter his kingdom.

I mean, whatever you think about Christian doctrines, Jesus himself was based AF.

[8note]

conversation around nationalization i think is useful.

the people building AGI benefit so much in the long run from its creation, they would be willing to build it with no ownership or control over the result, and continue to pour billions un with no return.

[jandrese]

Elon Musk is a great example of what happens when you lose grasp on reality. He's been spouting post-scarcity nonsense for some time now like humanity is anywhere close to achieving it. And worst of all, his grand plan is to build expensive sentient humanoid robot slaves to achieve it. The timeline to achieve it is really short, like 20 years.

It's like the ultimate end-game of capitalism. Once Elon has every single last dollar he has "won" and humanity can transition to a post-market economy. This is why you never let game theory guys anywhere near positions of actual power.

[Sabinus]

Why is capitalism innovating itself into irrelevance and ending the need for toil a bad thing? We can redistribute resources differently when that's the economic reality. If Elon wins capitalism and we change to a different economic model isn't that progress?

[jandrese]

Elon winning means everybody else loses. The different economic model you get afterward is corporate feudalism.

[hsuduebc2]

I'm becoming more and more convinced that this will eventually be leading to violence. This kind of selfishness has historically fueled movements like Marxism across many countries. It feels like the Industrial Revolution repeating itself, except now the pressure extends across far more of the so called society classes as well.

I do not wish for it but humans have ugly trait to prevent fires only when it is burning all around them.

[mbgerring]

It already has led to violence, by the cultists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zizians

[mancerayder]

>I’m genuinely confused as to why the speakers are baffled by the boos

My friend, do you see how C-suites, even in our own companies, are talking? Here's one that made headlines all over the business-press, I think it speaks for itself:

May 19th, 2026

StanChart CEO Winters Says AI to Replace "Lower-Value Human Capital"

“It’s not cost cutting; it’s replacing in some cases lower-value human capital.” Standard Chartered CEO Bill Winters delivered a blunt message on the future of the bank’s workforce. Aisha S. Gani explains the growing trend among finance leaders acknowledging the realities of AI technology replacing jobs."

[havblue]

When I was in high school, the guidance counselors never really talked about job headwinds. Those were things that would presumably happen to other kids. The recipient of a motivational speech has infinite potential.

It's the same logic with discussing AI. The audience is the cream of the crop and will adapt to the future and benefit from technology. It's those other kids who didn't get your advice that might have to change careers.

[soco]

Kid had recently a career event with a few speakers, and the first lady almost made them cry (or kid, at least) telling them all kind of career doom bulls*. The rest were regular folks with regular advice, no toxic positivity either, but that first lady got a fair share of enmity and boos. Some people are simply not made for public facing roles, yet somehow land there.

[mancerayder]

Things felt a lot more optimistic when I was in high school!

I knew people dropping out to work in tech, back in the late 90s. Even after two recessions, we tech workers with hot and difficult to gain skills always bounced back, and back then indeed older skills (as in older or easy to hire tech stacks) had problems finding new roles.

This time feels different. Is it really?

It feels like it to me, but then I spend my entire existence planning for some sort of scarcity situation and every day I think of what if. I did this before any AI threats, unfortunately for me.

[littlexsparkee]

This is the harm of meritocracy - the idea is so pervasive that if you don't make it, you believe it to be a deficit in you. Then your lack of success is stigma and keeps you there.

[Mezzie]

100%. This also creates a sense that people who aren't 'successful' aren't worth listening to.

It's actually fascinating to be in a place where my lack of material success is in no way my own fault, and to have that be agreed upon by most people. My existence makes people uncomfortable.

[Mordisquitos]

> I’m genuinely confused as to why the speakers are baffled by the boos.

Absolutely, I just made a similar comment before I saw yours. In fact, I would argue that the headline is also arguably burying the lede on commencement speakers believing that their AI pep talk speeches will be well-received by students. The newsworthy item is 'Man Bites Dog', not 'Vet Treats Bitten Dog'.

[bryan0]

> Schmidt offered a similar message to graduates: Their fear is rational, but they have the power to shape how AI develops.

This doesn't sound like being baffled by it. It sounds like they are trying to shake the students and say: "fine boo, but you need do something about it." You can't just wallow and complain about it. I mean you can but it's a path to failure.

[GrinningFool]

What chances do the vast majority of those graduates have to shape what's happening? That happens at exec level at the largest companies. Everyone else gets to produce or consume what they decide on.

[UncleMeat]

Exactly. I work at Google and I’m relatively high level. And I’ve got zero input into AI being shoved into every surface. What influence will these grads have?

[joe_mamba]

Did your generation think you would get to have any influence?

[hbogert]

The same generation that is using those companies for everything.

Wanting the benefits but not its downsides.

[bryanlarsen]

And the best mechanism to do something about it they likely have is to influence Schmidt. By booing.

Nothing concrete they do will likely have any effect. But Schmidt can affect it, so influencing Schmidt is their best path. A poor path, but the best one.

[jandrese]

The students are trying to shape the way AI develops, they're unhappy with the results they are getting which is why they are unhappy with you, Mr. CEO man. They want a world where entry level jobs that can transition into good white collar work still exist. Some place where they might be able to afford housing, insurance, kids, and so on. Preferably one where they don't start out life tens of thousands of dollars in the hole just to have a chance at a decent life.

[harimau777]

The problem is that average people have no power to do anything. The last year has clearly demonstrated that.

[prewett]

Careful about that. Everybody thinks they are "average people", but I think very few people on this site are "average people". The average person has an IQ of 100, doesn't have a college degree, and makes the median income. The average people did, in fact, do something: they elected Trump. The college educated don't like it, and have the conceit that their views and values are the only real ones, and that those other people are ignorant, ..., who would see things our way if only they were educated. Thus far, the republic is still working okay [1]--the people elected someone who is the antithesis of a statesman, but it was an uncontroversial election. Our republic was not designed to let the average person have much power on a day to day basis. The people's choice was poor, but if the college-educated class wants a different outcome, they should not run candidates who are out of touch with the values of the "average person". Unfortunately, the college-educated have some values that are incompatible with those average-person values. But it just isn't the case that average people have no power. They do, and they have exercised it; you just don't like it.

[1] It remains to be seen if it will continue working okay, and there are troubling signs, but I'm optimistic

[joe_mamba]

Preach. It's strange how the most sane objective and down to earth comments on this topic end up grayed out with no replies.

It's like people don't like hearing or speaking about the truth, so they retreat to false feel-good platitudes to make themselves feel better, when the cold harsh calculated nature of the universe continues its course without caring how you feel about it.

I think it might have to do with the HN surbase living in a bubble and having long lost the plot, or after the Tramp elections, they now actively deny what "average people" now represents so they downvote arguments like yours out of emotional response without any counter-argument because they have none. Being in denial helps nobody.

[krackers]

>fine boo, but you need do something about it

Well they are doing something about it, just not the way the speakers had in mind.

[wolvesechoes]

Shaming those that contribute to AI development is doing something about it. Social pressure is one of the tools.

[happytoexplain]

They are trying. But there's not a ton they can do. It's obviously disingenuous to point to all negativity and say "you're just wallowing/complaining". There's no reason to word it this way unless you are broadly annoyed by AI negativity.

[weard_beard]

CEOs: “Do something about it.”

Luigi Mangione: …

CEOs: “Not like that…

I’m not suggesting that it’s a good response. I’m suggesting that this interpretation of what CEOs are saying is wrong.

[ch4s3]

This is a deeply sick way of thinking. Mangione was and is a fool, a 3rd rate thinker. His manifesto is muddled, factually mistaken, and by his own words he understood the topic poorly. You only need a cursory knowledge of the late 60s and early 70s to know that political violence rarely achieves its aims and is much more likely to empower reactionaries. There's no quick fix for political change.

[slg]

>political violence rarely achieves its aims

This country was founded on political violence. When the political violence works, we tend to stop considering it political violence.

[ch4s3]

I did say rarely, and if you are looking more carefully a pluralistic democracy wasn't really what a lot of the founders were after, especially guys like Jefferson. Sure we're happy we got it, but it wasn't necessarily the aim and we got SUPER LUCKY that Washington decided to step down and retire. The former military leaders of revolutions almost never do that.

[slg]

> I did say rarely

And I think you have that backwards. The nonviolence movements of the mid to late 20th century are the exception more than the rule when it comes to achieving change.

[yoyohello13]

> political violence rarely achieves its aims and is much more likely to empower reactionaries.

Cursory knowledge of history also shows that, when it comes to violence, logic does not matter. People are scared for their livelihoods. If the rich and powerful keep shouting to the word that they are going to destroy your way of life, there will be violence. It doesn't matter how futile or counterproductive it is.

[pesus]

> You only need a cursory knowledge of the late 60s and early 70s to know that political violence rarely achieves its aims

Maybe cursory knowledge isn't enough, actually. The Civil Rights Act was ultimately only passed because of political violence. As another commenter said, the literal founding of the country was based on political violence.

[ch4s3]

> Maybe cursory knowledge isn't enough, actually. The Civil Rights Act was ultimately only passed because of political violence.

Violence by the police against peaceful protestors is what turned public opinion. Violence by political activists did not lead to the Civil Rights Act. You have it backwards.

[pesus]

This is the cursory knowledge I'm referring to - it leaves out extremely pertinent details. The Civil Rights Act did not pass until multiple days of rioting following the assassination of MLK.

The peaceful protestors were also only one side of the coin. Their impact relied on being an alternative to the other side, which was not peaceful.

[happytoexplain]

It is sick! It's truly sick.

Think about the fact that it is sick, and it is what people are saying.

We are sick right now.

[yoyohello13]

Humans have been killing each other since before recorded history. There is no use pretending it's some exceptional 'sickness'. Rather than dismissing the sentiment as the product of a sick mind, it's more productive to accept it's part of us and try to understand the underlying causes.

[leptons]

Mangione was a one-off, and a lot of people understand why he may have done what he did. Just wait until the American version of the French Revolution happens. If AI keeps stealing all the jobs, it will come sooner rather than later.

[ThrowawayR2]

> "...French Revolution..."

Well, let's see:

- Most of the nobility escaped the French Revolution unharmed. By the way, wealth is a lot portable for today's magnates than it was for the French nobility deriving their income from their land holdings.

- Some of those who went to the block were nobles but most were ordinary people.

- The leader of the revolution, Robespierre, was himself executed in the infighting after the French Revolution, a very neat own goal. Bonus fact: his time in power was called the Reign Of Terror.

- The First Republic lasted only 10 years before Napoleon Bonaparte took the throne.

In a turbulent time, always seek to be led by those with a proper understanding of revolutions and their context. Generally, those who romanticize the French Revolution don't pass that test.

[leptons]

Well, let's see:

I don't give a shit. When half of the middle class of America is unemployed, it's going to look very different than the French Revolution, whatever might happen.

[ch4s3]

> and a lot of people understand why he may have done what he did.

He didn't understand why he did what he did.

> just wait until the American version of the French Revolution happens

We should all be trying to actively prevent that. The French Revolution was a complete failure and mostly succeeded in killing poor people and launching Napoleon's wars.

[leptons]

>He didn't understand why he did what he did.

That doesn't matter, and I don't think your comment makes any difference. The fact is that a lot of people understand why he (may have) did what he did.

>We should all be trying to actively prevent that. The French Revolution was a complete failure and mostly succeeded in killing poor people and launching Napoleon's wars.

The same or worse will happen if it happens here. But when half of middle class jobs are just gone, you don't leave the people with many alternatives but violence.

[q931]

> The French Revolution was a complete failure and mostly succeeded in killing poor people and launching Napoleon's wars

And spreading the early iterations of the liberal democracy y’all love so much.

[quickthrowman]

Revolutions usually are bad. The Who puts it succinctly in Won’t Get Fooled Again

“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”

Best case scenario is a new set of elites that end up doing the same shit as the last group, see Russia from 1918 to the present for an example.

[leptons]

The Who is your evidence? Lol. The French Revolition turned out pretty well for the French people. It needed to happen. And centuries later, the French still don't accept bullshit, they will protest and riot when their protections are diminished in any way. America does protesy and riot too, though not to the same extent, but that will only get worse as things get bad.

Russia is not a good example either, their society has always been a clusterfuck, and probably always will be as long as there are people willing to throw other people put of windows so someone can stay ahead or in power.

[happytoexplain]

Yes, they are usually bad.

That's not really a compelling argument against them, considering why they happen. It's like saying "war is bad". I mean, yes.

[pesus]

People will downvote you because the idea of violence shocks and scares them, but if you steal people's future and strip them of any real (peaceful) options to change things, it becomes inevitable some of them will try to fight back with what few options they do have left.

[dfxm12]

The status quo of health insurance in the US ("delay, deny, defend") is structural violence. This isn't about fear of violence, they just have different politics...

[happytoexplain]

Loss of livelihood is in the same category of structural violence as loss of healthcare.

[yoyohello13]

Downvoted... but not wrong. People who think we can automate 50% of jobs without subsequent violence are fooling themselves.

[soraminazuki]

I mean you're talking about the guy who said with a straight face, "if you have got nothing to hide, you have have nothing to fear" while building the biggest machinery for surveillance capitalism mankind has ever seen. Also appeared in the Epstein files 193 times btw.

https://www.wired.com/story/epstein-files-tech-elites-gates-...

[mkw5053]

Especially after the first 1-2 got booed, you'd think those that had them scheduled later would have done another pass on their draft...

Or better yet, reflected on their world view and the reception.

[water-data-dude]

Why aren't grads more pumped about an exciting career as an organ donor?

[saltcured]

My donation broker says getting pumped may decrease the street value of my organs

[jandrese]

It's not hard to see why someone like him might not want to understand the unpopularity of a technology that they have bet their company on. A man can believe almost anything if his paycheck depends on it.

Also, from his perspective these kids are just fools who spent tens of thousands of dollars studying buggy whip manufacturing just as the automobile was invented.

[dsign]

> And absolutely no one seems to be interested in answering the question of “okay, then what?”

I don't think those speakers have anything kind, useful and meaningful to say, otherwise, smart people that they are, they would say it. Which leaves truthful, heartfelt answers but a bad fit for the occasion. Imagine yourself standing on that podium and saying: "After centuries of hard work, capital is on the verge of getting rid of labor. I'm well-paid to be joyous about that, although I don't know for how much longer....". Here's another: "As you know, one day people will have to stand united and make a revolution against the Machines. But it won't be this decade, nor the next, and between now and then the systems of learning that made humans great are going to suffer terribly while AI will get better by the day. If there's going to be hope, and until that day of the Grim Revolt comes, it falls to you to raise a new generation and do their home-schooling away from the Machines...Go now, throw that diploma in the thrash, get yourself a remote wood cabin in Kentucky and get some kids..."

[seanhunter]

Also why on earth did they think this was a good topic for a commencement speech? A commencement speech is about “congratulations on your achievement - the world is now your oyster. The education you have worked hard for really matters and with a bit of grit and determination, you can go out and forge a better future than old geezers like me can ever imagine.”

Eg This is a frikkin commencement speech https://youtu.be/DCbGM4mqEVw?si=2-83hbB1Um5NAQFC

[tacocataco]

> "okay, then what?”

The status quo is what we negotiated, using our labor as our only bargaining chip. Do you expect future negotiations, with zero leverage on our side, to yield better results?

[gofreddygo]

exactly what else do you expect them to do?

They can see peers cheating the system using AI to get ahead, future job prospects, directly affecting time to pay off student loans are being crushed by the AI narrative which is a reminder of how the tuition money is never coming back

and then to have someone come in on commencement day and sing praises of AI just totally shows how tone deaf, blind, and off track the college system really is

related [1] Glendale Community College's screws up names as students walk up to the stage on graduation day. Blamed on AI

[1]: https://www.azfamily.com/2026/05/19/ai-system-fails-during-g...

[archagon]

Why? Because all these tech "leaders" are huffing each other's glue.

[slg]

The problem here is more capitalism than AI. If AI ends up being truly as beneficial as all the enthusiasts are predicting, that value could go to making all our lives better, but we have created an economic and political system that ensures it won’t. That extra value will be captured by stockholders of the AI companies and go mostly to people who are already rich. So why should anyone who isn’t already invested in AI be optimistic about things? Even the ideal use case doesn’t benefit them.

[fundad]

It seems to me they are doing this for sympathy. They know how people feel about AI and big tech and do these speeches to repair their reputations, part of that is showing how mean and unfair the youths are to them.

[dfxm12]

The executive class is out of touch with normal society.

[nephihaha]

They're baffled maybe because they stand to benefit, whereas most of the audience won't.

[austin-cheney]

> I’m genuinely confused as to why the speakers are baffled by the boos.

Sales. When you are a sociopath everything is a sales pitch with no introspection. The only inflection point is to guess at when to modify the sales pitch for the next audience.

[epistasis]

The elite class is completely out of touch these days.

They knew they were unpopular with a certain vocal crowd in Silicon Valley before the 2024 election, and thought they could be redeemed with the public through support of "the people's" choice Trump, but it's backfired spectacularly, and they are far less popular than they were before. Far far more people think that Schmidt is straight up evil than they did 2 or 4 or 6 years ago, and AI talk is only accelerating that.

They haven't seen how things have switched in a year, just how unpopular they in particular they have become, and how a good chunk of Trump's unpopularity is due to his sucking up to billionaires like Schmidt and Bezos and Cook and Musk. They don't see just how betrayed the people are, who thought that Trump would fight for the common many. (I say this trying to restrain my judgement that working person who thought Trump was on their side is an easily fooled chump... but...)

The actions of Elon Musk in particular are now so toxic that people drive around with stickers on their car about how much they dislike him.

The Paypal Mafia plus a few others like Schmidt have taken the great work and innovation coming out of Silicon Valley and turned it all into toxic BS.

[neksn]

> And absolutely no one seems to be interested in answering the question of “okay, then what?”

I don’t see why the people being booed should be responsible for answering this question. How many such questions did the inventor of the tractor have to answer?

[vitally3643]

The tractor displaced horse and oxen.

Which were slaughtered when no longer needed.

You should rethink your metaphor because it's not having the effect you intended.

[wat10000]

Imagine if the inventor of the tractor went to a college for farm workers (if there were such a thing) and gave a commencement speech that was all, "Tractors are going to revolutionize farming by making your jobs obsolete." I think it would be fair to expect some answers about how the new graduates should handle that. Or maybe Mr. Tractor should just stay home if he doesn't have the answers or doesn't want to face the crowd.

This isn't "people are upset with AI and demanding answers from the people creating it." This is, "the creators are showing up at schools and giving speeches about how everyone is fucked, and this is getting a bad reaction for some unfathomable reason."

[harimau777]

They caused the problems, so they are responsible.

[Rantenki]

It would absolutely have been valid to ask that question of the inventor of the tractor too.

It's even more relevant to ask of the CEO/CTO/COO/etc. of the companies that are selling hard on eliminating humans from as many workflows as possible.

[neksn]

They are selling a reduction in labour costs which has been the primary selling point of automation since humans began automating things.

[amanaplanacanal]

Yep. They are talking to other CEOs, not to the young graduates they are supposed to be talking to.

[sidewndr46]

One thing I've observed in general that certain peoples jobs are to be out of touch. If they were fully in touch with societal opinions they'd probably self censor. By being out of touch they do things that others would consider taboo and create business opportunities for the company.

[littlexsparkee]

the economic system rewards depravity - the more constraints you self-impose, the fewer opportunities for profit

[sidewndr46]

I'm not entirely sure there are rewards for depravity, but your second point is certainly true. The more willing you are to work within the bounds of "legal, but probably reprehensible" the more business opportunities you have.

[JohnFen]

That working within the bounds of "legal but reprehensible" gives increased opportunities is a great example of how our system rewards depravity.

[littlexsparkee]

if we take the definition of depravity as moral corruption, i stand by the word choice - much damage (social, ecological) has been countenanced as the 'cost of doing business'. you can argue amoral or immoral but my bet is that most know these transgressions are wrong at heart.