I’ve been getting from interacting with LLMs…with doing more and more and more and more…is not healthy for me or good for the world. It is careless, and has disconnected me from where people are on this.
I think this is very honest and we shouldn’t give someone shit for speaking up.
This. AI and more generally algorithm dependence is an addiction and watching him struggle with it the past few years has been heartbreaking. Watching him try to bargain and rationalize an objectively misanthropic technology that grew out of a sphere that he was a major role in and did begin as an objectively beautiful attempt at building community and healthy dialogue is very disappointing. I don’t hate or judge him. He tried to do something beautiful. He just didn’t understand the Faustian bargain he made in the process. The systemic forces turning his work into poison.
I don’t judge him for wrestling with it. I’m sad for him. I’m sad for a lot of us. We’re all working in a system that’s slowly killing us to some degree or another. There is no ethically clean life in a system predicated on greed, gluttony and lies. His optimism may have slipped into delusional, but it beats the crushing cynicism that comes with naked realism.
I don’t think that we should lose hope, but the future can’t look like this. His Icarus moment shouldn’t be the end of his journey. I hope he finds himself and begins planting new seeds even if none of us ever live to see the shade of the trees that grow from them.
Well said
deleted by creator
Yes. He doesn’t want to admit, he’s gone as far down this path as he responsibly can. He doesn’t want to transition to the “producer” role, where he becomes a resource for a new generation that’s seeking a future away from the old platforms.
It’s a bit like the oil man who knows his work enabled so much good, unable to also admit his product has a dark side, and it’s time for us all to move on from it. That times changed and a new world is struggling to be born.
I disagree about “edutainment” in a qualified way. We still need communicators and domain experts sharing their knowledge, and there’s still a great deal of knowledge to share, but I don’t think it’s on YouTube (or TikTok). People talking out of turn on matters so far outside their expertise and experience they’re effectively neophytes, and just as vulnerable to Dunning-Kruger impulses certainly doesn’t help. I don’t think that AI or better algorithms are going to save them either, that’s a good way to end up lost in a psychotic hallucination. I don’t know what it will look like yet but it isn’t going to come from the tech giants. Unless Wikipedia wants to take a crack at it, they might be the only ones that could pull it off.
But this is the first time there’s been this significant of an impact on one’s mental health(?) I’m unsure. It’s so easy to get caught up in that dopamine hit where you feel like you did something. Its even more frustrating when you’re forced to use it in work regularly, whether directly or indirectly (if you’re coworkers are using it there is an indirect force to use it if you need to stay competitive and keep your job and feed yourself and your loved ones especially if your workspace is not healthy)
Thought experiment: is it better to treat the AI as a contractor (fivver etc) who is doing the task you’re asking rather than thinking of it as something you’re doing? From a mental health perspective A contractor because you are only to talk a out the task and nothing else really. That way it’s work could be more distant and you’re less likely to associate it to your work and boost in productivity?
No. This is a line we cannot cross and if it destroys us, so be it. I’m not against AI, or automation. But not these tools. Not these companies. Not these models. The question is death or death. So we learn to live without, or we die. There is no synthesis possible with this paradigm.
The cats out of the bag, so what are we gonna do now. Like replace that but not this with any other tech you should stop using, say social media, good luck. So what are we going to do now?
What do we do? We’re doing it. We’re asking questions, we’re building communities IRL and in digital paces outside the bounds of the major corps. We use poison pills to make corpos that embrace these systems pay dearly. We give grace to those who sincerely pull back and we move on.
Cocaine exists and it can be a major boost to productivity. But we don’t have to use it. We don’t have to live with its downsides slowly killing us and robbing us of our humanity.
I mean, we are all going to die. In fact it’s the fear of that that built these AI systems. If you want to go against them then accept death and extinction as our future.
No. I refuse. We may die, but I refuse to surrender. Where there is life, there is hope, and we’re not dead yet.
Agreed, this is new technology for everybody, we’re allowed growing pains.
Its pretty fucking simple to not use it.
Then you’re not critically trying to think and examine the implications of this new technology. And that’s fine, we all can’t do all the things but we can listen to the people around us without being pretentious tools who would say I told you so.
It would also have been simple to not use any technology ever that has had controversy around it
But unless you are actively a lodite hermit living in the woods with no connection to the world. In which case your opinion on the topic doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things since clearly you already have a unhealthy relationship with reality.
Learning to have a healthy relationship with new tech is how to actually deal with shit. Not ignoring it forever as if pandoras box wasn’t open.
It’s not going anywhere, even if the bubble pops and all of it dies. Local models will only become more and more common, the tech will only become easier and easier to run and more efficient and effective.
Even if it devolves into a specialist tool for research and science only. That still is going to be something you will have to come to grips with.
The tech is far far more than just chat bots.
We are about to get hardware built for AI specifically. None of this will go away.
And people could simply not work for major corps.
And they could simply not buy plastic clothes from Walmart.
And they could simply grow their own food.
Etc etc.
Hank Green has earned the right, with me anyway, to have his point of view heard. And frankly he has more credibility with me than the garden variety pitchfork-wielding anti-AI mob. I think Hank is a person who finds AI interesting and sees upsides as well as downsides. But the aforementioned mob is not interested in anything other than the emotional catharsis of railing against something they hate.
Now ask me if the mob is in the room with us, because it probably is.
His AI use caused him so many problems in his private life that his family had to intervene. His point of view is “This technology has had a negative impact on my life and the lives of the people I care about”.
Your pro-AI spiel is a bit tone deaf here
But they didn’t say anything pro-AI. At most they were anti-anti-AI mob, which is just reasonable, as is with any “mob”. And I read mob here as mindless parrots that keep repeating talking points and hating for the sake of conformity.
Being anti-anti something is being pro-something. That’s the beauty of the double negative.
Also that’s just a very pro-AI user, so the intent can be inferred
You’re conflating two different somethings. Anti-AI mob is not the same as AI. Being against mob mentality doesn’t make you inherently pro AI.
It’s possible to be pro or anti mob mentality and AI in various different combinations.
That’s… Not how any of that works?! You can be anti chat bot llm, anti anti ai mob hater, and pro llm science and research bot.
There’s more to the tech then just the chat bots the anti ai mob dipshits all seem to think of when llms come up.
That’s exactly how that works lmao. “Anti” means “opposite”, not some neutral third thing
anti-anti-AI ≠ pro-AI, it assumes there’s only anti-AI and pro-AI and nothing in between.
And the wording was clearly about the anti-AI mob as opposed to people who understand the dangers and benefits of AI. It’s similar to the difference between a Gamer™ and a gamer.
I’m anti anything mob. The fucking groupthink on certain issues is real.
I’m also anti people who make shit up and then try to sell it as a long strings of “inferences.”
And after having AI shoved down my throat at work for two years while my teammates get laid off, I’m pretty anti AI too. At most I have direct experience with it that teaches me it has some uses, like summarization.
You’re full of shit. You’ve been told. And you know it by now. But you’ll probably bleat on with more of the same because it’s all you know how to do. Proceed, I guess.
lol sure pal. At least stick to your guns next time.
Brave showing, bravo. I’m glad someone came out of the woodwork to illustrate the monomaniacal mob behavior I was talking about. You did just perfect.
You’re on Lemmy… any statements about AI, Musk, trump, McConnell, etc that aren’t over-the-top against them will be met with downvotes.
Okay but why would anyone be anything but over-the-top against anything on your list?
I mean, like, everything you listed is dog shit.
That’s what I keep fucking asking, Like how can anyone with half a brain be okay with any of them?
Because sometimes in life there are nuances and it is possible to mention one of those topics in a neutral manner, but the absolute hostility held here against anyone who tries to have a conversation beyond “_____ sucks ass!” is exhausting.
This is not one of those times. I don’t want to have a conversation with someone who thinks neutrally about any of those topics.
There wasn’t an intervention, he asked them about his AI use in response to the outrage and they agreed he’d been using it unhealthy.
Seemed to me more along the lines of “do I have too much salt?” , “yeah you should cut back” ; Then “your coke problem is tearing this family apart”
He said they “did not pull any punches” which implies it was a more blunt conversation than you’re suggesting.
Hank Green himself describes his relationship with AI the same way you would an addiction, and specifically mentions the dopamine reaction driving his use of it to a point where he became overwhelmed by it.
He’s not describing a casual discussion about table salt, he’s literally describing a drug/alcohol addiction.
I said nothing pro-AI. But by accusing me of that, you reveal where your own bias (and defensiveness) lies. So thanks for that.
You’re also exaggerating the facts. They didn’t stage an intervention. He turned to his wife and brother and said “do you think my AI use is unhealthy?”
You’ve said plenty pro-AI lol. You don’t have to get so defensive about it, just own your position.
I’ve exaggerated nothing. Hank himself said he’s spoken to both his wife and brother about his AI use and said they “didn’t pull any punches”, which implies there was a blunt conversation about it, if not two.
You don’t actually fucking know him.
That’s probably why he wrote an in depth explanation of what he did, his motive, how it affected him etc.
His public posts on the matter were not made for the people who actually know him.
You sound like you lick Grok and Gippitys silicon balls.
I don’t even know what that second one is, and I wouldn’t touch Xitter with a ten foot turd.
Ok, I guess you were too busy fondling Gr0ks and gipeettys balls to type out a constructive response. Are these how you’d like them to participate in your silicon fetish?
I literally use no AI in my day to day. I try and bully AI users tbh
Good job, now shut the fuck up, adults are talking.
That’s fair. It’s a new technology, we need trusted people to explore it and tell us what their experience was. I don’t think we have very many trusted people left
For me it’s just another disconnected millionaire Youtuber. But he‘s kind of blaming AI or rather his relationship with LLMs for this dilemma instead of actually reflecting on himself. If he thinks simply abstaining from using LLMs will establish a connection to the people he‘s dead wrong and will likely fall back on AI in no time.
Alright, so he got addicted to what felt like an easy source of knowledge. Can happen to anyone.
I guess I’m just tired of finding things to be upset about. I’ve lived more than five decades and it’s been outrage after outrage after outrage.
I’m tired, boss.
He’s admitted there was a problem and it got out of hand. If he changes, what’s the huge deal going forward?
We need social safety nets. We need universal health care. We need to kick fascists out of our government. And sure, we need to fix smaller problems, but jesus christ does every last thing have to be drama?
Preach.
We need tolerance. Our society has become so dictatorial, even the most left leaning and liberal ones, we simply cannot tolerate anything we don’t agree with.
Everyone wants to make their own perfect universe where everybody says and does one thing. We should accept each other’s mistakes and faults, and live in more harmony.
Yeah, I feel the response has gotten way out of hand. Sure, I’m not happy about it. But I have some faith Hank will actually reflect on the situation.
he probably needs to take a break from uploading and wait a while.
Taking breaks is not what creators do anymore after a backlash as it kills the channel. He will keep posting stuff. Maybe even ride the anti AI wagon for engagement. He‘s a content creator through and through.
5 decade club reporting 🫡 and I’m tired too.
“If it bleeds, it leads.” Drama leads to clicks, clicks lead to advertising, advertising = money. Same ol’ story, its just super easy now with the internet.
Also an old.
The outrage machine has never been anything but a slow drip of poison to keep us too overwhelmed/afraid to see what the oligarch class is doing to us.
Now it’s a fire hose.
Hate is an easy way to engage users, that is why most news channels use it as a hook when formatting articles.
I’m tired of it too.
This is an issue I’m seeing more and more of. People are demanding that others be perfect at all times. We all fuck up and make mistakes. If we write off everyone we’ve ever disagreed with as irredeemably bad, then we’re telling people there’s no point in growing and changing.
When I was a kid in the early 90s in Texas, I thought homosexuality was immoral. I was wrong and I’ve spent the last 30 years preaching for inclusion and tolerance. And that’s the story for most people my age. In the 90s, a Democratic President banned openly gay people from being in the military.
If we want to change society, we have to invite others to our side with open arms, not condemn them.
People demand others be perfect so they can live vicariously through them while their own life is a miserable mess. They refuse to have any form of introspective and self acknowledgement of themselves to make their own lives better, so they need others around them to be perfect, even if those others is a para-social relationship with a Youtuber.
I can understand why this technology would be particularly addicting to hank.
His whole persona is answering questions like “what color flower do bees like the most” with the kind of enthusiasm that shows his curiosity and deep passion for science. So a machine where you can put in those sorts of questions and get an almost instant answer would be very addicting.
But when I get fixated on something, I want the correct answer. I’d hate to learn the wrong answer and repeat it to someone - I’ve done that before and I hate it. That’s why I avoid AI on principle. I want the right answer and AI won’t give that to me about things I know about so I won’t trust it on things I don’t know about.
You should avoid social media. You aren’t immune to wrong answers here either. You can just read it from another person and carry it with you. Best get offline!
For what he’s trying to do, it’s not even a horrible use-case. But as someone is a ready to go to the mat on fact checking, he’s definitely not anywhere near arduous enough about it.
He’s not treating it like aunt marge. You wouldn’t make a tv show around finding out truth, then go ask your aunt Marge and not follow up on her answers.
AI for general information gives you approximate directions at best, maybe you got a wikipedia page and maybe you’re reading 297 regurgitations of some asshole that didn’t know what the fuck he was talking about on reddit who got reposted over and over.
The best way I’ve seen it put is that ai is the perfected form of the wisdom of the masses. It’s 90% right 90% of the time. But the most important part is the last 10%.
90% is good enough for most things in your day to day life that have no consequences. But it’s like people have forgotten what it was like before smart phones.
Back when your best chance of a good answer was asking who ever was in hear shot if they knew and just accepting that as good enough. You never treated it as fact just as the best answer your going to get at the moment.
For anything important you would go to the damn library.
It’s 90% right 90% of the time. But the most important part is the last 10%.
No LLM model system card claims such high rate as 90%. Fable claims in its system card, what, 40% hallucination rate?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.10791 yep (no Fable score here)
Only they’re not “answers”. AI does not provide information, it tells you what you want to hear. It even makes up fake scientific papers as “references”. So you think your info is backed up by peer reviewed sources. Nope!
The better models absolutely will cite real scientific papers that are relevant to your discussion. It doesn’t hallucinate as a matter of course, it can hallucinate some of the time. You can’t trust what it gives you 100%, you have to verify it. But it very often gives useful answers and information.
One of my favorite economics bloggers for decades started sourcing his information with LLMs. He was such a bright guy. 😭
It even makes up fake scientific papers as “references”
Broski, it’s not early 2023 anymore. Thinking models with internet access have been able to provide public sources just for over a year now. Technology evolves; shocking, I know…
That’s just not true.
A polemic article that personally insults Hank Green instead of laying out a case. Brain melting AI psychosis indeed.
Thanks, saves time to not read it.
There are few people I trust more than Hank Green when it comes to something like AI.
And that‘s exactly the problem. Somehow this guy has earned a lot of trust and he wasn‘t handling that trust very well. That‘s why people who stand for something like him, should be held accountable and to higher standards than say your aunt posting AI cats with hats in the family group chat.
His recent history puts him at the bottom of the list of people I would trust regarding AI.
I don’t generally click on random YouTube videos unless more information is provided, but I give this one a gamble. It was pretty well done and I appreciate the creators overall point and evidence. For anyone else in the comments, I think there are two couple of second long clips of Hank Green that are used to make a larger point about what are essentially attempts at normalizing AI.
Right after posting this, I stumbled on basically a text version of the same sentiment. I can understand not wanting to trust a random YouTube video, even if it is about a guy who most people know due to his own YouTube videos.
The post being: https://www.fromjason.xyz/p/notebook/hank-green-and-the-fantastical-tales-of-god-ais/
Wow, this guy can write. When I got to “The Ghost Stories of Savannah”, I thought for moment that it was an unnecessary detour - then I saw it.
Echo the other commenter, wow this dude can write.
It’s sad, I noticed this too. I excitedly clicked a Hank Green video about energy and water usage on datacenters and was SUPER disappointed in it. I’ve worked in energy generation as an engineer for a while, and some of the takes in that video were so obviously big tech’s doomerism rhetoric
Let me save everyone a click.
This December 2025 video, 20+ minutes long, barely contains any information about Hank Green on AI. The Hank Green content there is consists of one or two lines he spoke in Sci Show videos buried deep in a diatribe about how AI is overblown.
I don’t think the video is worth watching at all, but it is certainly not a relevant contribution to this thread.
I thought something was up when he had interviewed some random ass AI expert talking about Mythos because he bought into the whole “OMG it’s gone rogue” bullshit.
I’m not a huge fan of the videos he hosts (I don’t like how he cuts every millisecond between sentences), but SciShow is a genuinely good channel and I’m glad he realized he had problems. Wishing him all the best!
I really don’t get it. It’s so easy for me not to use AI 99% of the day, same as not using social media. I cannot understand why people get addicted to it so easily.
He seems fairly prone to ego stroking, which internet goers would typically label as narcissistic.
Kind of the target audience for the sycophant machine
See the knitting debacle… where SciShow put out an episode about the science of knitting which was poorly researched and it was clear that they had consulted zero knitters.
I’ve always really liked SciShow - to the point I’ve assigned some episodes to my students - but it’s just embarrassing when it would have been trivially easy to hit up Ravelry and run the video past people who won’t call yarn “string.”
some of the recent episodes were quite sloppy. they just stuck to the original format.
What are you using it for during the 1%??
Personally I’ve found that ai is fantastic at pulling files off my phone cause I’m a lazy shit… Iv trained it so that when I tell it “do the thing” it pulls all the pictures off my phone and backs them up.
It’s fun, whimsical, and while I could do it a host of other ways. This is just more fun.
Which is honestly kinda what I see as one of the better use cases for local models. Sure you could do the same thing with a script, or by hand.
But it’s not as /fun/ as having a little robot butler that slings one liners from various cartoons that you don’t have to prepick as it enacts your will.
…so your good use case for AI is running a task apps have been able to do automatically for 20 years…?
It’s like buying a robot butler to manually turn off the lights
Yes we did that with smart bulbs. We aren’t against the robot butler.
That’s what I’m saying. The butler is overkill for a solved problem
Just have the ai make the script. It’s going to go off the rails one day and you’ll regret that whimsy.
I’m on your side, but replace AI or social media with “meth” in your argument and see how that logic works. (Becoming easily addicted to something vs. avoiding something [because using it would rapidly become addictive])
Here’s Hank’s response on Reddit.
Reddit blocks me. Can anyone post it here?
Three things to start:
I’m mortified that I have let so many people down and I think I understand how that happened.
I’m going to change things about how i make stuff.
Complexly’s AI policy is public and well-considered and adhered to by the whole team, I think it’s worth reading! (Complexly is the non-profit that makes Crash Course and SciShow and a bunch of other shows that I do not write for.)
https://docs.google.com/document/d/14E2JfjNoLdQPSlkyZdCN_8scQlxl4CT1PdZ0iE1IEg4/edit?tab=t.0
The thing that everything we do is based on is that you know that what I’m saying are my thoughts coming from my brain in the way I decide. I have made that harder and I’m sorry. I have been relying too heavily on AI as a research aid. It can be very useful for this task, giving me access to a lot of papers I didn’t know existed really fast, but I think that has been to the detriment of my work because it has not given me the freedom to find all of my own ways into and around a topic.
But, for clarity, the origin of claims in my videos are not “ChatGPT’s said this.” I have been using AI to locate papers and other resources for learning about topics. You are still getting my takes based on what I read, know, and learn.
I think what people have said in this thread about me diluting myself is spot on. Ultimately, what I am most scared of is ruining myself for people, but I have not been managing my impulses well. You need to know that my words are mine. I don’t think that this hasn’t been true, but I’ve been moving so fast that my own process isn’t actually clear to me and I want to have it be a guarantee moving forward.
What I can’t guarantee, though, is that we will agree about this technology or what to do with it. I think that’s good. We need a lot of kinds of folks critiquing this technology.
I’m not a pure AI-hater, which people in the AI industry know, so when I say that the way these models were trained deeply disturbs me, that lands differently.
When I say that I think that the speed at which these companies are trying to consolidate economic power should freak out everyone in the world, that’s coming from someone who has “nuanced takes.” When I say I worry about the climate impacts of this rollout, that is not me saying, “I don’t think this tech should ever exist” it’s me saying, “for god’s sake please don’t make our biggest problem worse.” It is very likely that you (the reader) and I disagree on how or even whether AI should be used. I think it makes sense for that disagreement to exist. But I have also always believed that my audience is more likely to be right than I am. You know what this feels like in a way I can’t. And I am so sorry for diluting myself in this way and harming the thing that we have all built together.
As for the “why don’t you just make less! No one is making you do this!” I’m not sure that’s how I work. I’ve been feeling the pressure of “Oh, I have this little video idea, I need to get it out real fast so I can get to the more important stuff” and I create when I feel that pressure.
But making more things does not make me make better things. It does not make the big thing that we’ve been doing for 20 years better. I know that I can manage myself more effectively. I want to make videos like the one I made yesterday on hankschannel where the writing was the whole thing and I felt it all the way down and have been so enriched by people’s responses to it. And sure, I’m probably going to make dumb unscripted straight to camera thoughts videos sometimes. And then I’ll play connections.
But mostly I need to come to terms with the fact that the level of dopamine I’ve been getting from interacting with LLMs…with doing more and more and more and more…is not healthy for me or good for the world. It is careless, and has disconnected me from where people are on this. I was talking about this with Katherine last night and she did not pull any punches. Frankly, neither did John. Neither of them think I’ve been being healthy. I need to readjust.
SO - what changes.
Expect less hankschannel. It may need to pause for a while.
It may be that Hankschannel comes back with writing and research support. It may be that it comes back with just way fewer videos. I am going to spend this time finishing a video I’ve been working on for ages that I think really really matters. 2. SMUSH and 4x3 are getting paused as well. If there are bugs, there are bugs. I have backlog of 4x3 boards right now and, frankly, writing them is usually a solace to me, but if we run out, I am not going to worry about that…so if it just reverts to a static board one day…that’ll be that.
I do deeply want to support good store and complexly in whatever way I can, so there may be some stuff on that front. But the reliance on me has always been risky, so we need to build for that as well.
I’m very sorry for harming the thing this is all based on.
I gotcha:
Three things to start:
I’m mortified that I have let so many people down and I think I understand how that happened.
I’m going to change things about how i make stuff.
Complexly’s AI policy is public and well-considered and adhered to by the whole team, I think it’s worth reading! (Complexly is the non-profit that makes Crash Course and SciShow and a bunch of other shows that I do not write for.)
The thing that everything we do is based on is that you know that what I’m saying are my thoughts coming from my brain in the way I decide. I have made that harder and I’m sorry. I have been relying too heavily on AI as a research aid. It can be very useful for this task, giving me access to a lot of papers I didn’t know existed really fast, but I think that has been to the detriment of my work because it has not given me the freedom to find all of my own ways into and around a topic.
But, for clarity, the origin of claims in my videos are not “ChatGPT’s said this.” I have been using AI to locate papers and other resources for learning about topics. You are still getting my takes based on what I read, know, and learn.
I think what people have said in this thread about me diluting myself is spot on. Ultimately, what I am most scared of is ruining myself for people, but I have not been managing my impulses well. You need to know that my words are mine. I don’t think that this hasn’t been true, but I’ve been moving so fast that my own process isn’t actually clear to me and I want to have it be a guarantee moving forward.
What I can’t guarantee, though, is that we will agree about this technology or what to do with it. I think that’s good. We need a lot of kinds of folks critiquing this technology.
I’m not a pure AI-hater, which people in the AI industry know, so when I say that the way these models were trained deeply disturbs me, that lands differently.
When I say that I think that the speed at which these companies are trying to consolidate economic power should freak out everyone in the world, that’s coming from someone who has “nuanced takes.”
When I say I worry about the climate impacts of this rollout, that is not me saying, “I don’t think this tech should ever exist” it’s me saying, “for god’s sake please don’t make our biggest problem worse.”
It is very likely that you (the reader) and I disagree on how or even whether AI should be used. I think it makes sense for that disagreement to exist. But I have also always believed that my audience is more likely to be right than I am. You know what this feels like in a way I can’t. And I am so sorry for diluting myself in this way and harming the thing that we have all built together.As for the “why don’t you just make less! No one is making you do this!” I’m not sure that’s how I work. I’ve been feeling the pressure of “Oh, I have this little video idea, I need to get it out real fast so I can get to the more important stuff” and I create when I feel that pressure.
But making more things does not make me make better things. It does not make the big thing that we’ve been doing for 20 years better. I know that I can manage myself more effectively.
I want to make videos like the one I made yesterday on hankschannel where the writing was the whole thing and I felt it all the way down and have been so enriched by people’s responses to it. And sure, I’m probably going to make dumb unscripted straight to camera thoughts videos sometimes. And then I’ll play connections.But mostly I need to come to terms with the fact that the level of dopamine I’ve been getting from interacting with LLMs…with doing more and more and more and more…is not healthy for me or good for the world. It is careless, and has disconnected me from where people are on this.
I was talking about this with Katherine last night and she did not pull any punches. Frankly, neither did John. Neither of them think I’ve been being healthy. I need to readjust.SO - what changes.
Expect less hankschannel. It may need to pause for a while.
It may be that Hankschannel comes back with writing and research support. It may be that it comes back with just way fewer videos. I am going to spend this time finishing a video I’ve been working on for ages that I think really really matters.
2. SMUSH and 4x3 are getting paused as well. If there are bugs, there are bugs. I have backlog of 4x3 boards right now and, frankly, writing them is usually a solace to me, but if we run out, I am not going to worry about that…so if it just reverts to a static board one day…that’ll be that.I do deeply want to support good store and complexly in whatever way I can, so there may be some stuff on that front. But the reliance on me has always been risky, so we need to build for that as well.
I’m very sorry for harming the thing this is all based on.
Thanks for linking that. I wonder how long he’s been using it for. I feel like I noticed at uptick lately in just how saccharine his writing and worldview was getting
Yeah, that new cosmic shore video was really good. I’m kind of disappointed that might be just AI writing.
Was that the recent one about the NASA photos making a short gif? Maybe I’m just too insufferably pessimistic for that kind of thing
That’s the one. Felt like he was going for a Sagan kind of prose, and was half decent. Though it rings a little hollow to me, now.
People need to chill the fuck out
it’s more fun to flip out over random harmless bullshit than stuff that actually matters though.
How DARE you!
Hank has been an advocate for knowledge for far longer than LLMs have existed. His recent use of them is disappointing, but I fell like this does not discredit the work he has done throughout his career to push curiosity.
What he does next will be important and will decide how I interact with his content going forward. It seems like he is aware of his missteps and is looking to make a change.
I am not a perfect human and do not expect celebrities to be perfect at all times.
Glad he’s recognizing the problem and trying to get help. Instant gratification is a hell of a drug.
I‘m a little surprised how easy Lemmy goes on a millionaire Youtuber who refuses to take actual responsibility of his actions. Mind you, there are worse things than producing slob but people really believed in that guy. And all he offers is a non-apology first where he stated that he doesn‘t really remember. Followed by saying AI psychosis made him do it. Just be an adult, man. That‘s all I‘m asking.
when he messed up was when he pissed off the crochet and knitter crowd. 😂
He’s been obviously struggling since he got cancer. He’s in remission now and that’s great but I’ve been watching him slowly slip into PTSD. I have medical PTSD, I have cystic fibrosis and had a double lung transplant in 2014 and I see him devolving the same way I did. I’m literally two days away from getting out of an inpatient trauma treatment center that I’ve been at for a month because I didn’t take the medical PTSD seriously because I didn’t realize I needed to, I think he is in the same boat. I think he was already spread way too thin then cancer happened and he’s stuck in a hyper reactive state which is exhausting and eventually leads to the more classic PTSD symptoms and he’s probably turning to LLMs to try to keep up as the PTSD drains his batteries and he’s unaware of it. I hope he gets help soon and he doesn’t wait for it to get as bad as I did, PTSD kills if you let it get away from you.
I’m sorry that things got bad enough to require inpatient care, but I’m glad you were able to get some help — I hope it did actually help. I know from firsthand experience that one never fully recovers from PTSD, in the sense that you can’t go back to how things were before. However, I also know that it’s possible to continue living life with the psychological equivalent of a massive scar, even if it is still red and angry and often painful — but not really possible to when instead of a scar, you have an open, gaping wound.
I hope you were able to make some progress towards healing, even if it’ll take much longer to fully heal.
I also appreciate your attempt to leverage your own experience to promote compassion for Green. I’ve not read the rest of the comments here yet, but I can imagine there are a lot of people with uncharitable stances towards the situation. I am pretty steadfastly anti-AI, but I think it’s important that we consider the person at the centre of any problematic AI use
I only started paying attention to him recently, but I could swear he had a little meltdown in a video hating AI and had to calm himself with his word association game. Maybe I’m thinking of his brother.
He ends all of his videos with that game if he hasn’t played it already that day
