Accept it. Like I said, it's a tool.
Nas cerimônias de formatura desta primavera, estudantes universitários americanos transformaram um ritual de celebração em um ato de resistência coletiva, vaiando palestrantes que elogiavam ou simplesmente mencionavam a inteligência artificial. O gesto, repetido em estados como Arizona, Flórida e Tennessee, revela uma geração que herda um mercado de trabalho em transformação acelerada e que se recusa a aplaudir o agente dessa transformação. Não é apenas tecnofobia: é a expressão pública de uma ansiedade legítima sobre autoria, emprego e o custo ambiental do progresso digital.
- Estudantes de formatura em múltiplos estados americanos vaiaram palestrantes ao menor sinal de elogio à inteligência artificial, transformando cerimônias solenes em confrontos geracionais.
- No Glendale Community College, um sistema de IA contratado para ler nomes dos formandos falhou repetidamente, obrigando centenas de estudantes a cruzar o palco duas vezes — a falha tecnológica se tornou metáfora viva das preocupações da plateia.
- O CEO da Big Machine Records pediu aos estudantes que 'aceitassem' a IA como ferramenta inevitável; a multidão não se deixou convencer, sinalizando que o argumento da inevitabilidade já não pacifica.
- Enquanto a maioria vaiava, alguns estudantes apoiam a tecnologia em silêncio, revelando um estigma interno que complica qualquer leitura simples do fenômeno.
- Especialistas interpretam as vaias não como rejeição irracional, mas como pensamento crítico saudável — e defendem que essa voz jovem deveria moldar as políticas tecnológicas que ainda estão sendo escritas.
Foi com vaias que a temporada de formaturas americanas de 2026 entrou para o debate público sobre inteligência artificial. Em universidades do Arizona, Flórida e Tennessee, estudantes reagiram com desaprovação vocal sempre que palestrantes elogiavam ou mencionavam a IA — uma resposta coletiva, nítida e politicamente carregada.
Na Middle Tennessee State University, Scott Borchetta, CEO da Big Machine Records, descreveu o ritmo vertiginoso das mudanças tecnológicas e defendeu a IA como ferramenta inevitável da produção cultural. Quando as vaias começaram, ele pediu que os estudantes aceitassem a realidade. A plateia não cedeu.
No Glendale Community College, o problema foi ainda mais concreto: a instituição havia contratado um sistema automatizado para anunciar os nomes dos formandos. O sistema falhou repetidamente — pulando nomes, errando pronúncias, travando. Centenas de estudantes precisaram cruzar o palco duas vezes. Quando a reitora explicou que se tratava de um novo sistema de IA, também foi vaiada. 'Foi uma lição para nós', admitiu.
Nem tudo foi rejeição. Na Grand Valley State University, Steve Wozniak, cofundador da Apple, arrancou aplausos e risos com uma piada sobre IA — lembrando que tom e contexto fazem diferença.
Fabrizio Cariani, professor de filosofia da Universidade de Maryland e responsável por um curso chamado 'IA e Experiência Humana', ofereceu uma leitura mais matizada. Os estudantes que vaiam, explicou, carregam preocupações reais: impacto no mercado de trabalho, especialmente em vagas de entrada, integridade acadêmica e o custo ambiental dos grandes modelos de linguagem. Há também um estigma em torno do uso da IA em trabalhos acadêmicos, o que faz com que apoiadores da tecnologia permaneçam em silêncio.
Cariani não viu as vaias como sinal negativo. Para ele, representam jovens pensando criticamente sobre o mundo que herdam — e a pergunta que fica é se essas vozes serão ouvidas quando as decisões sobre o futuro da tecnologia forem tomadas.
It started with boos. When speakers at American university commencement ceremonies this spring began praising artificial intelligence—or even just mentioning it in passing—students in the audience made their displeasure known. The reaction was sharp, public, and unmistakable. At one ceremony, the moment a speaker noted that AI had barely existed in daily life just a few years ago, the crowd switched to applause, as if relieved to hear something true.
These scenes played out across multiple states. In Arizona, Florida, and Tennessee, during the spring graduation season, similar confrontations unfolded. Universities had invited prominent speakers from various industries to share wisdom with their graduating classes—a tradition as old as commencement itself. But this year, the technology question had become a flashpoint.
At Middle Tennessee State University earlier this month, Scott Borchetta, CEO of Big Machine Records, spoke to the media and entertainment school's graduating class. He described how technological change had accelerated dramatically: the pace of development in the last decade, he said, had outstripped the previous fifty years combined. Streaming had rewritten economics. Social media had rewritten discovery. And now, he argued, artificial intelligence was rewriting production. When students began booing, Borchetta pushed back. "I know," he said. "Accept it. Like I said, it's a tool." The crowd was not persuaded.
The situation at Glendale Community College in Arizona revealed a different kind of problem. The institution had deployed an automated system to read graduates' names aloud during the ceremony. The system failed repeatedly—skipping names, mispronouncing them, or simply stopping. Hundreds of students were affected. When the college's president, Tiffany Hernandez, addressed the crowd and explained that they were using a new AI system for the announcements, she too was booed. "It was a lesson for us," she said. Many graduates had to walk across the stage twice: once when the machine failed, and again when a human being read their name correctly.
Not all reactions were negative. At Grand Valley State University in Michigan, Steve Wozniak, Apple's cofounder, drew applause and laughter when he made a joke about artificial intelligence during his commencement address. The response suggested that skepticism about AI was not universal—and that tone and framing mattered.
Fabrizio Cariani, a philosophy professor and department head at the University of Maryland who teaches a course called "AI and Human Experience," offered context for the divided response. Students today hold mixed feelings about artificial intelligence, he explained. Some embrace it openly or quietly. Others—and Cariani believed the booing graduates represented this group—worry deeply about AI's impact on the job market and entry-level employment. Beyond employment, students expressed concerns about academic integrity, the authenticity of their own work, and the environmental cost of training large AI systems.
Cariani cautioned against reading the commencement booing as a wholesale rejection of AI by the entire student body. There is, he noted, a stigma around using artificial intelligence in academic work, which means some students who support the technology keep quiet about it. But the vocal skepticism was real and rooted in genuine anxiety about the future. Cariani did not view the booing negatively. Instead, he saw it as evidence that young people were thinking critically about the technology—and he hoped they would push harder to shape the policies that govern it. The question, he suggested, was not whether students should have opinions about AI, but whether those opinions would actually be heard when decisions got made.
Citações Notáveis
There is certainly a group of students who embrace AI, openly or discreetly. But there are also students—and I think that's what we saw in these commencement examples—worried about AI's impact on the job market and entry-level employment.— Fabrizio Cariani, philosophy professor at University of Maryland
Streaming rewrote the economy, social media rewrote discovery, and AI is rewriting production right now.— Scott Borchetta, CEO of Big Machine Records, at Middle Tennessee State University
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why do you think the booing happened at these specific moments? Was it planned, or spontaneous?
It felt spontaneous—a collective exhale. When someone on stage praised AI as inevitable progress, students heard something that didn't match their lived experience. They're worried about jobs, about whether their own work will be valued. The boos were a way of saying: we're not convinced this is good for us.
But some students applauded when a speaker said AI wasn't around a few years ago. What changed in that moment?
The framing shifted. That speaker was acknowledging reality—that this technology is new, that we haven't figured out how to live with it yet. It gave permission to think critically instead of just accepting inevitability.
The Glendale situation seems different. That wasn't about ideology—it was a system that literally failed.
Exactly. And that failure was almost too perfect as a metaphor. Here's this technology supposed to make things better, and it couldn't even read people's names. It forced the institution to admit the tool wasn't ready. That's a different kind of lesson.
Do you think the booing will actually change anything? Will universities reconsider how they use AI?
Maybe. Cariani thinks the critical thinking matters—that students engaging with these questions seriously is how policy gets better. But there's a gap between students voicing concerns at a ceremony and institutions actually listening. That's the real test.