This. It's so far out there that I have to wonder if it's a rogue employee who thought this a good excuse to cause reputational damage without it being too obvious. Doesn't pass several razors though (not the simplest explanation; malice involved.. is that Hanlon's and Occam's razor?), so I don't truly believe it... but it would be possible
Since it's AI and Microsoft I can believe that someone who doesn't know what they're doing would be given a mandate to promote AI under any means necessary at the cost of some other team's reputation.
But it's an insane move. If anything AI has made it more important than ever to know who authored something and then someone does this to promote AI.
Occam's razor is about the simplest solution often being the correct one.
Hanlon's razor is about not assuming malice, which makes no sense when applied to faceless mega-corporations or even random strangers where you know conflicting motives exist.
Thanks for confirming I remembered the razor names correctly!
I still don't assume malice, at least as a default / until strongly indicated otherwise, from any individual employee. Emergent behavior of complex artificial incentive systems is, of course, a whole other matter so I can see what you mean that the razor won't apply there without breaking it down to an individual as in the scenario I mentioned about an ill-meaning employee
