Smith listened to the abuses, considered how kids were making him and others feel about AI, and came to a conclusion: Kids are wrong. In response to what he called a “powerful wake-up call to the tech sector” for the generation entering the workforce, he wrote a 3,000-word essay that those kids are definitely going to read during their summer vacation to get his message of embracing change.
To begin his essay, Smith offers the kind of introduction that will be familiar to any college student writing a paper a few hours before the deadline: an analogy that doesn’t really work if you think about it. “In 1838, the invention of the camera predicted that photography would make artists obsolete,” he wrote. “Why would anyone pay an artist to slowly and painstakingly depict a scene when a camera could do the job with greater accuracy, more quickly, and at less cost?”
Now, if you follow his analogy, he is effectively setting up students who criticize AI as the modern equivalent of those who claim cameras will destroy art. So it feels when he writes that the overwhelmingly negative reactions of undergraduate classes to AI are a reminder that “people will insist on having a say in deciding when and how AI is used.” Ugh, those evil people are getting in the way of progress.
One way to read students’ praise goes something like this: “We hate this technology. We hate that it has destroyed the entry-level job market for us. We hate that you keep claiming it has the same level of intelligence that comes after years of hard work in our education. We hate the ‘art’ that comes out of it. We hate the way it widens the growing wealth inequality gap.”
Then how did Smith read it? “Students and graduates recognize the benefits of AI. But they want to keep AI in its proper place,” he wrote. “The rejection of synthetic fibers and artificial intelligence demonstrates how human taste shapes market economics despite increased efficiency and productivity. Machines don’t buy products. People do.” It’s not clear that students will like his message, even if it is clear and straightforward, limited to consumer behavior, but hey, Smith has positioned himself as a Gen Z whisperer here.
Smith offers little suggestion that any of this will slow down. Recall that earlier this year, another Microsoft executive had said that AI would eliminate white-collar jobs within 18 months. Instead, he said little about the next generation’s concerns, saying, “Get used to it.”
Even though he acknowledged the challenges faced by 20-somethings when entering an extremely rough job market, calling it “a perfect storm,” his final message was not to effectively fight the waves. He wrote, “Constant change has taught you how to adapt faster. As AI reshapes the way we work, you don’t need to unlearn decades of habits like some of us did. You are better equipped to move forward.” “Technology will change, but you can stand strong and speak loudly for the values that are timeless. Agency. Ambition. Dignity. Everything accomplished through work and technology gives us purpose.”
Basically: “We hear you. We’re not going to do anything to address any of your concerns, but don’t you feel like being heard? And isn’t that really all you want?” Perhaps a better advice for the graduating class of 2026: Organize.
<a href