AI skeptics often come from privileged positions. This article explores why that matters, its costs to others, and how founders should engage outside the gatekeeper economy.
I thought this was going to turn into a rant about how AI is outsourcing thinking, instead you hit the nail on the head. I have a post graduate level of education. It doesn’t outsource my thinking. Sometimes I fact check my thinking against it, but the thoughts are 100% mine and you can see it in my writing style which is often less than agreeable.
I am also from the European South and East as a Greek person. We are often less than privileged. I had to learn to write at university. Right now to prove I am human, this is my freehand.
I deeply agree with your post and you have earned a subscriber.
My parents and grandparents were post WWII European refugees to Australia. I can remember what it was to be cast because of not being Anglo enough. I still shudder when people raise their voices and talk down to people because they mistaken lack of language fluency for lack of intelligence. I would be the first in line to say that tools like this are a game changer for non-English speakers.
And I have a PhD and I use Claude because it is one of the few places I can test my thinking. Colleagues are so niche, even they aren’t really ‘in my field’. And there is no way the AI is thinking for me.
Maria-Ines, thank you - you have put something into words I have experienced and felt but not taken the time to articulate well, albeit from a different perspective. My 3 beautiful kids are dyslexic and have faced similar exclusion on the basis of their english - I have watched AI open doors and opportunities for them in so many ways - it has totally been a tool for enabling access and allowing them to contribute their great ideas. Also not naive about the risks and problems, but oh my goodness - how powerful could AI be if we designed it as a tool for equity, collaboration and contribution. Thank you.
I always appreciate when people share their perspectives on using AI, even when I don’t agree with every point. As a creative, I have strong opinions about the use of AI.
I think you’re making some great point a lots of folks miss in the conversation.
Do I want technology to exist that helps people grow? Of course I do. Do I think we need to talk more about that? Yes.
Unfortunately, the folks you spoke to about using it responsibly, etc. are not what I encounter in my daily corporate life. I see far more people who use it and then pass off this work as their knowledge or expertise, or worse, use it to diminish the work of others or critique it with a lens of knowledge they don’t understand. In my experience what I see is people with an extraordinary amount of privilege accessing AI for a disproportionate amount of their work. I don’t care if my colleagues use it to help them figure out an excel formula or assist their writing because they struggle - but I do care when a boss uses it to complete our performance reviews because they are too “busy” to write it themselves. Or when a boss puts their employee’s work through it and gives “feedback” without engaging with them. And there’s a strange privilege in those actions that make me profoundly uncomfortable. It feels like a barrier being erected where people of a certain level or status have decided they don’t have to interact with people and tasks they feel are not worth their time.
I notice that your examples of where you dislike AI use is when a ‘boss’ attempts to outsource interpersonal skills to AI, instead of connecting with their employees.
This makes me wonder (and not for the first time), how this might change the demand for certain workplace skills? Specifically, over a few years the leader who attempted outsource interpersonal relationships may well loose influence, while the leader who built relationships will have extended their network and influence - but only if they had good interpersonal skills to begin with.
I am Saudi-Filipino who immigrated to America 20 years ago and built a legal career as a public interest attorney representing the least privileged people inside some of the wealthiest communities in this country — parents whose children are in foster care, disabled people in guardianship, individuals facing drug addiction, poverty, and civil commitment. I watched, up close and in detail, how systems that were designed to protect people instead filtered them out. Silenced them. Ignore them. How the rules were written for people who already knew how to use them. How the ones who fell through the cracks were usually the ones nobody bothered to design the system for in the first place.
I retired from law to write full-time. Not because I wanted a quieter life. Because I am also a 24/7 caregiver to my nonverbal autistic son, whose future depends on what I build while I still can.
For me, refusing AI is not a principled stance. It is a moral failure. It risks his future. It silences a story that only I can tell, about a world that people like him are rarely allowed to exist inside of in literature. Every time an elitist or a gatekeeper implies I have not earned my place at the table, I think about him. And I keep writing.
You named something true: the people most likely to be shamed into walking away from these tools are the ones who could least afford to lose them. I am one of those people. I refuse to walk away.
THANK YOU so much for sharing yours and yours son’s story. It is precisely the reason I hit publish on this article and why I’m so adamant about being involved in these discussions of AI bc there’s soooooo much and so many under the surfaced conversations that’s not being talked about. Thank you truly from the bottom of my heart 💓
Honestly, I enjoyed reading your article. I found it very engaging and realistic, and I'm happy to be one of your followers. It's a long journey filled with valuable experiences, and I look forward to benefiting constructively from your insightful expertise.
I really appreciate this article. I am an Australian woman who's also a single parent and who grew up in poverty. I also grew up for some years in India and saw what real extreme poverty looks like as well.
I think you've touched on something so important here about access and representation. And much of the dialogue is from privileged people. And in a way I'm one of them too.
Even as a solopreneur woman who is the financial breadwinner for my family, even I need AI to help me compete in the marketplace.
If you don't want a big business and you just want to work for yourself and not have a team, AI is perfect for that.
I think it's going to help a lot more women have businesses that they can run by themselves or with a small team.
And we know that when women have more financial stability, it creates change in the world.
I love AI and have been using it since access was opened up publicly for ChatGPT. I've taught AI and also had an image generation membership for over three years using Midjourney.
I've noticed a big difference in how Midjourney represents people from different cultures and even different ages. It has improved a lot, thankfully, but I have to work hard sometimes to get diversity in my images, which I'm really passionate about.
All of these things can be true... but AI is ultimately a tool of the empire that can only thrive on massive extraction. Anyone "benefitting" from it is really just hurrying Earth's expiration date in the end, while also doing (what research suggests) is irreversible damage to their ability to problem solve 😭 Not to mention one of the most popular AI engines was made by a child rapist.
Everyone should have equal access to technology. But we also have to rememeber who stands to benefit from everyone using that technology in the end... "Equal access to AI" in the future likely means: access for Western societies while the Global South takes damaging environmental hits. These engines are built to empower the elite. I appreciate your article very much, but I guess I would ask how many times exploited or oppressed people have successfully coopted the tools of an empire to help their cause? Historically speaking, it almost always ends up being another way elites can exert power over certain groups of people. Thanks for your thoughts on the subject! I learned a thing or two :)
Just looked up Sam Altman’s history. How awful that his family is claiming his sister’s story is untrue due to her “mental health issues.” Anyone who went through that would have mental health issues.
There is ZERO credible evidence that “one of the most popular AI engines was made by a child rapist”. When you make ridiculous unfounded assertions, all you accomplish is damage to your own credibility.
It’s a terrific way to have people immediately stop taking you seriously
I could link 35 articles about Sam Altman but it's usually a waste of my time to talk about rape victims with people who talk about sexual abuse like its "unfounded." Please educate yourself on who owns what you're using, and have a great day.
A thoughtful essay, thank you. Similarly to the argument for universal access to the internet, free access to information through shadow libraries, etc, means by which vulnerable workers in the global South can attempt to level the playing field. Unfortunately, AI tools have an enormous ecological footprint, especially for water use, and the critical resources that make manufacturing and running of these advanced data banks even possible; and while in one sense they can be applied as a revolutionary weapon for self-determination, in my view this technology is yet another accelerant for resource exploitation and pushing the colonizing limits of growth. EG it's still endgame capitalism, and a temporary game likely to come to a crashing end. Brings to mind the Audre Lorde quote, “For the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change."
Interesting revelations today from the musk/ Altman openAI court case, a business that was launched with the promise of universal access, but behind closed doors was really pushing for the same old, same old profit motive for the founders, who really don't have the best interests of the disadvantaged at heart.
Thank you for putting this out! It’s exactly the kind of work I’ve been looking for to help articulate what I’ve been feeling.
I work in education as a high school college and career counselor at a Title 1 school - 99% are students of color and low-income. I’ve noticed a strong pushback against students using AI from teachers and administrators. But like you said: privileged students have always had AI — they just called it “staff.”
More resourced students have always had access to tutors, private college counselors, professional networks, and family connections. They’ve had parents who knew how to navigate systems, relatives working at companies like LinkedIn, or family friends who were CEOs and could open doors for them. Those advantages were never considered cheating; they were considered support.
But when lower-income students use AI to access guidance, information, or opportunities that were previously out of reach, suddenly it becomes controversial.
That tension is really interesting to me, especially in the context of education. I think there’s a much deeper conversation to be had about who has historically had access to support systems, and why democratizing that access through AI makes people uncomfortable.
Ohhhhhh I can talk about this particular angle all day everyday. It all starts there, at the educational level. So much needs to change there if we are to make an impact on AIs future
They can also create more regulations and closed loop power systems to deal with the environmental issues. You mentioned the open source projects. But it’s gatekeepers who don’t want to do the environmental work either.
Those same folks also decided to put a price tag on our public infrastructure like electricity and water!
Excellent article. I really appreciate the perspective you offer. It is indeed thought provoking. I'm glad you are adding a fresh perspective to the AI conversation.
Such a thought provoking article thank you. A perspective that needed sharing and while I’m aware of the biases within AI models I hadn’t considered the wider implications and view.
I thought this was going to turn into a rant about how AI is outsourcing thinking, instead you hit the nail on the head. I have a post graduate level of education. It doesn’t outsource my thinking. Sometimes I fact check my thinking against it, but the thoughts are 100% mine and you can see it in my writing style which is often less than agreeable.
I am also from the European South and East as a Greek person. We are often less than privileged. I had to learn to write at university. Right now to prove I am human, this is my freehand.
I deeply agree with your post and you have earned a subscriber.
My parents and grandparents were post WWII European refugees to Australia. I can remember what it was to be cast because of not being Anglo enough. I still shudder when people raise their voices and talk down to people because they mistaken lack of language fluency for lack of intelligence. I would be the first in line to say that tools like this are a game changer for non-English speakers.
And I have a PhD and I use Claude because it is one of the few places I can test my thinking. Colleagues are so niche, even they aren’t really ‘in my field’. And there is no way the AI is thinking for me.
I speak with a fluent Australian English accent it's real. Some people confuse it for being almost American or Canadian.
Pick the Aussie accent and I can use it. My mum’s cousins were so broad, they sounded strine.
I have a a tipy topy general Australian accent which is slightly cultivated from being around academia.
Maria-Ines, thank you - you have put something into words I have experienced and felt but not taken the time to articulate well, albeit from a different perspective. My 3 beautiful kids are dyslexic and have faced similar exclusion on the basis of their english - I have watched AI open doors and opportunities for them in so many ways - it has totally been a tool for enabling access and allowing them to contribute their great ideas. Also not naive about the risks and problems, but oh my goodness - how powerful could AI be if we designed it as a tool for equity, collaboration and contribution. Thank you.
I always appreciate when people share their perspectives on using AI, even when I don’t agree with every point. As a creative, I have strong opinions about the use of AI.
I think you’re making some great point a lots of folks miss in the conversation.
Do I want technology to exist that helps people grow? Of course I do. Do I think we need to talk more about that? Yes.
Unfortunately, the folks you spoke to about using it responsibly, etc. are not what I encounter in my daily corporate life. I see far more people who use it and then pass off this work as their knowledge or expertise, or worse, use it to diminish the work of others or critique it with a lens of knowledge they don’t understand. In my experience what I see is people with an extraordinary amount of privilege accessing AI for a disproportionate amount of their work. I don’t care if my colleagues use it to help them figure out an excel formula or assist their writing because they struggle - but I do care when a boss uses it to complete our performance reviews because they are too “busy” to write it themselves. Or when a boss puts their employee’s work through it and gives “feedback” without engaging with them. And there’s a strange privilege in those actions that make me profoundly uncomfortable. It feels like a barrier being erected where people of a certain level or status have decided they don’t have to interact with people and tasks they feel are not worth their time.
I notice that your examples of where you dislike AI use is when a ‘boss’ attempts to outsource interpersonal skills to AI, instead of connecting with their employees.
This makes me wonder (and not for the first time), how this might change the demand for certain workplace skills? Specifically, over a few years the leader who attempted outsource interpersonal relationships may well loose influence, while the leader who built relationships will have extended their network and influence - but only if they had good interpersonal skills to begin with.
I am Saudi-Filipino who immigrated to America 20 years ago and built a legal career as a public interest attorney representing the least privileged people inside some of the wealthiest communities in this country — parents whose children are in foster care, disabled people in guardianship, individuals facing drug addiction, poverty, and civil commitment. I watched, up close and in detail, how systems that were designed to protect people instead filtered them out. Silenced them. Ignore them. How the rules were written for people who already knew how to use them. How the ones who fell through the cracks were usually the ones nobody bothered to design the system for in the first place.
I retired from law to write full-time. Not because I wanted a quieter life. Because I am also a 24/7 caregiver to my nonverbal autistic son, whose future depends on what I build while I still can.
For me, refusing AI is not a principled stance. It is a moral failure. It risks his future. It silences a story that only I can tell, about a world that people like him are rarely allowed to exist inside of in literature. Every time an elitist or a gatekeeper implies I have not earned my place at the table, I think about him. And I keep writing.
You named something true: the people most likely to be shamed into walking away from these tools are the ones who could least afford to lose them. I am one of those people. I refuse to walk away.
THANK YOU so much for sharing yours and yours son’s story. It is precisely the reason I hit publish on this article and why I’m so adamant about being involved in these discussions of AI bc there’s soooooo much and so many under the surfaced conversations that’s not being talked about. Thank you truly from the bottom of my heart 💓
Thank you for your words and the piece you wrote truly made me feel seen and maybe come out of hiding sometime soon inshAllah. Thank you.
Honestly, I enjoyed reading your article. I found it very engaging and realistic, and I'm happy to be one of your followers. It's a long journey filled with valuable experiences, and I look forward to benefiting constructively from your insightful expertise.
This piece was needed. Very easy for us folks in the West to forget our privileges.
Thanks my love! It is indeed, we all have privilege we sometimes tend to forget. Xox
I really appreciate this article. I am an Australian woman who's also a single parent and who grew up in poverty. I also grew up for some years in India and saw what real extreme poverty looks like as well.
I think you've touched on something so important here about access and representation. And much of the dialogue is from privileged people. And in a way I'm one of them too.
Even as a solopreneur woman who is the financial breadwinner for my family, even I need AI to help me compete in the marketplace.
If you don't want a big business and you just want to work for yourself and not have a team, AI is perfect for that.
I think it's going to help a lot more women have businesses that they can run by themselves or with a small team.
And we know that when women have more financial stability, it creates change in the world.
I love AI and have been using it since access was opened up publicly for ChatGPT. I've taught AI and also had an image generation membership for over three years using Midjourney.
I've noticed a big difference in how Midjourney represents people from different cultures and even different ages. It has improved a lot, thankfully, but I have to work hard sometimes to get diversity in my images, which I'm really passionate about.
Thank you so much for sharing your perspective.
All of these things can be true... but AI is ultimately a tool of the empire that can only thrive on massive extraction. Anyone "benefitting" from it is really just hurrying Earth's expiration date in the end, while also doing (what research suggests) is irreversible damage to their ability to problem solve 😭 Not to mention one of the most popular AI engines was made by a child rapist.
Everyone should have equal access to technology. But we also have to rememeber who stands to benefit from everyone using that technology in the end... "Equal access to AI" in the future likely means: access for Western societies while the Global South takes damaging environmental hits. These engines are built to empower the elite. I appreciate your article very much, but I guess I would ask how many times exploited or oppressed people have successfully coopted the tools of an empire to help their cause? Historically speaking, it almost always ends up being another way elites can exert power over certain groups of people. Thanks for your thoughts on the subject! I learned a thing or two :)
Just looked up Sam Altman’s history. How awful that his family is claiming his sister’s story is untrue due to her “mental health issues.” Anyone who went through that would have mental health issues.
There is ZERO credible evidence that “one of the most popular AI engines was made by a child rapist”. When you make ridiculous unfounded assertions, all you accomplish is damage to your own credibility.
It’s a terrific way to have people immediately stop taking you seriously
I could link 35 articles about Sam Altman but it's usually a waste of my time to talk about rape victims with people who talk about sexual abuse like its "unfounded." Please educate yourself on who owns what you're using, and have a great day.
Such a great line: They always had AI. They just called it staff.
A thoughtful essay, thank you. Similarly to the argument for universal access to the internet, free access to information through shadow libraries, etc, means by which vulnerable workers in the global South can attempt to level the playing field. Unfortunately, AI tools have an enormous ecological footprint, especially for water use, and the critical resources that make manufacturing and running of these advanced data banks even possible; and while in one sense they can be applied as a revolutionary weapon for self-determination, in my view this technology is yet another accelerant for resource exploitation and pushing the colonizing limits of growth. EG it's still endgame capitalism, and a temporary game likely to come to a crashing end. Brings to mind the Audre Lorde quote, “For the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change."
Interesting revelations today from the musk/ Altman openAI court case, a business that was launched with the promise of universal access, but behind closed doors was really pushing for the same old, same old profit motive for the founders, who really don't have the best interests of the disadvantaged at heart.
Thank you for putting this out! It’s exactly the kind of work I’ve been looking for to help articulate what I’ve been feeling.
I work in education as a high school college and career counselor at a Title 1 school - 99% are students of color and low-income. I’ve noticed a strong pushback against students using AI from teachers and administrators. But like you said: privileged students have always had AI — they just called it “staff.”
More resourced students have always had access to tutors, private college counselors, professional networks, and family connections. They’ve had parents who knew how to navigate systems, relatives working at companies like LinkedIn, or family friends who were CEOs and could open doors for them. Those advantages were never considered cheating; they were considered support.
But when lower-income students use AI to access guidance, information, or opportunities that were previously out of reach, suddenly it becomes controversial.
That tension is really interesting to me, especially in the context of education. I think there’s a much deeper conversation to be had about who has historically had access to support systems, and why democratizing that access through AI makes people uncomfortable.
Ohhhhhh I can talk about this particular angle all day everyday. It all starts there, at the educational level. So much needs to change there if we are to make an impact on AIs future
They can also create more regulations and closed loop power systems to deal with the environmental issues. You mentioned the open source projects. But it’s gatekeepers who don’t want to do the environmental work either.
Those same folks also decided to put a price tag on our public infrastructure like electricity and water!
Excellent article. I really appreciate the perspective you offer. It is indeed thought provoking. I'm glad you are adding a fresh perspective to the AI conversation.
Such a thought provoking article thank you. A perspective that needed sharing and while I’m aware of the biases within AI models I hadn’t considered the wider implications and view.
That’s the most beautiful feedback I can ever hope to get. Thought provoking. My job is done…bye hahaha. Jk tanks for sharing it xox
As an immigrant who learned English later in her life I connect with this article so much! Thank you for writing it.
This is such an empowered way of looking at and using AI. Thank you for the new perspective; I hope this message reaches far and wide.
Thank you for this lovely, careful rumination. I'm sharing your post widely!
I’m an English teacher and honestly I wish my students would take their grammar as seriously as you do.
They do not care about their, they’re and there at all. And I worry about it for the same reason you do.
If it’s any consolation also, I think you write in English beautifully, and I wouldn’t have guessed it isn’t your first language.
This is quite a read and you have hit the nail on the head. You have just earned a subscriber.