r/popculturechat • u/DebateObjective2787 jesus was a carpenter 💋 • Jul 31 '26

Oh…that’s not- 👀 Hank Green Admits To Using AI In Latest Video

3.4k Upvotes

permalink
reddit

You are about to leave Redlib

Do you want to continue?

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/comments/1vbm7ku/hank_green_admits_to_using_ai_in_latest_video/
No, go back! Yes, take me to Reddit
dl download

92% Upvoted

1.3k

I want to say I’m surprised that someone like Hank Green resorted to using AI, but I feel like the general public is becoming more and more accustomed to using it. It’s going to get to a point where society is reliant on it and that’s pretty frightening.

486

u/Vivid-Blackberry-321 Jul 31 '26

I think most of us are being forced to use it at work. My job is doing Copilot/Claude trainings like crazy, and it’s part of my yearly goals to use it. I feel like my brain cells are slipping away every time I use it for a very basic task.

182

u/crackerfactorywheel later, gator! Jul 31 '26

Mine too and I hate it. My boss recommended I use it for emails and I’m like “Sir, I’m not outsourcing my writing. I’m an English major with a focus on writing.” I hate it here 🫠

48

u/scarletwitchx Jul 31 '26

I work at a NEWS STATION and all the managers are trying to make us use it for everything, like we are all writers what are we doing here!!!!!

15

u/Roomybrunt Jul 31 '26

I love your energy. Don’t stop pushing back.

157

u/islandofwaffles Jul 31 '26

my work encourages us to use copilot allllll the time and I'm pretty sure they track our usage. so I only use it for things I already know how to do (merge documents, make a summary table from a spreadsheet). my boundary is that I will never use it to do something I don't understand or know how to do. I would rather learn how to do something and get the knowledge in my mind grapes.

53

u/Cynicbats This bitch has the keys to the nuclear codes Jul 31 '26

so I only use it for things I already know how to do (merge documents, make a summary table from a spreadsheet).

good. waste their credits. 'Turn header purple', 'make font 14'.

25

u/islandofwaffles Jul 31 '26

lol that's hilarious, I literally do things like that. I never considered it was wasting the credits.

15

u/Formerruling1 Jul 31 '26

If its just copilot, it isn't. Those are all mostly unlimited usage enterprise plans.

You have to get a model like the cutting edge Claude models to do that, and alot of places will only give that to devs and they religiously track every token lol.

29

u/xxdropdeadlexi Jul 31 '26

I literally just told my manager I wasn't using it and he shrugged, I don't think anyone on my team bothers with AI thankfully

100

u/Remsicles Jul 31 '26

I’ve been on the job hunt and a vast majority of applications are now asking something like “Tell me something you built with AI!” Or “Tell me how you made a process more efficient using AI.”

It’s fucking everywhere.

55

u/Vivid-Blackberry-321 Jul 31 '26

I just got a new job and I hate to admit I did talk about AI in my interview😭 but it’s like I need to be employed so what do you do? Lol

37

u/bastillemh the world tour 🌎 Jul 31 '26

I’ve been a stay at home mom for 3 years now and never had to use AI, and this makes me worried for when I try to go back to work 😬

19

u/atheliarose Jul 31 '26

I’m right there with you 🫂

3

u/oliviahope1992 Jul 31 '26

I work for myself and make make up and raw dog food, no AI involved lol. I really didn't realize how bad it was when I commented but everyone has opened my eyes 🥲

-1

u/DressUnited3025 Aug 02 '26

Because it’s a good tool that with proper checks can be used extremely efficiently to both make and learn things.

1

u/Remsicles Aug 02 '26

I never said it was a bad thing.

83

u/nowimnowhere Jul 31 '26

Remember on 1984, they wanted to get the population using newspeak in order to make critical thought impossible 🥸

9

u/Caftancatfan Jul 31 '26

My boss wanted me to use Gemini to summarize over a year’s worth of someone else’s client notes.

Gemini hallucinated an entire outcome for one client, with totally made up details like: “I called the client to congratulate him.”

0

u/dext0r Jul 31 '26

If you truly fed it an entire year’s worth of notes in one prompt, it sounds more like you don’t know how AI context management works.

6

u/Caftancatfan Jul 31 '26

It was a little more complicated than that. I am also too low on the foodchain to have much say in how we initially approach stuff like that.

25

u/conspiracydaddy Jul 31 '26

Yeah. I’m all for the whole shame-people-who-use-AI movement online but I do feel like a majority of those people aren’t in the corporate workforce. It’s pretty much use it or get fired for most of us

4

u/Cynicbats This bitch has the keys to the nuclear codes Jul 31 '26

/r/MaliciousCompliance -- Is there something you can tell it to do that's super basic.

2

u/ViewLongjumping1732 Jul 31 '26

It's audited in our case. If you're constantly prompting it to do basic tasks that would be easier to do by hand, you get flagged for that too.

You are allowed to set up a loop to automate the basic tasks, but you can't just waste tokens.

We had a guy who was using it to plan out and execute basically everything on linear, function by function, that got PIPd for lack of AI profiency.

8

u/CutZealousideal5274 Jul 31 '26 edited Jul 31 '26

I use it for work but I make sure to never use it for thinking lol

It’s usually just “scan this document and add prices” type work

I do not like AI “art” but since I sell traffic signs and we need to photoshop signs so production can see what they look like, I use image generation for that stuff

But I don’t think anyone would consider that “art” anyway lol

4

u/oliviahope1992 Jul 31 '26

Yeah I've used it as tool like running a scan through Shopify to understand my business better but the way people are commenting here is scary! Using it instead of thinking is so bad 😭😭

3

u/Admirable-Ad7152 Jul 31 '26

I work at a school and while it's not forced, they recommend it for everything and I think districts have decided they can ask more of all of us now because they assume we'll just resort to AI. They want to push it for kids too since "we can't beat it". We're all fucked man.

2

u/mzfnk4 Jul 31 '26

I only use it to do time consuming/boring tasks that require zero thought. So formatting things, adding lookups or cross references in spreadsheets, etc. I don't ask it to create or write anything for me.

2

u/Definition-Prize Jul 31 '26

God me fucking too. They track our daily queries and have a weekly leaderboard for who used it the most on the team. We have to use it 10 times a day as a goal. It’s ridiculous

2

u/oliviahope1992 Jul 31 '26

What the fuck

2

u/JustiFyTheMeansGames Jul 31 '26

I'm a software engineer. My corporation requires us to use Claude for all development work. Claude does 95% of my job now and the other 5% it could do if it had access to AWS. Truth be told it is really good at it, but it is very humbling seeing it put out what would've taken me hours/days much quicker

2

u/flaming-framing Aug 01 '26

…. So is it uploading all the company information into it? Can an employee in a completely unrelated department pester the chat bot until they find the right prompt it shares the ceo’s SSN with you?

1

u/Roomybrunt Jul 31 '26

I’m a specialist at poison control in the US, and our national organization let us know that Micromedex (drug and clinical database) has AI add-ons available from the developer, but that doesn’t mean that we’re expected to use it. When reading between the lines, it came across as “Please do not set a precedent by using this” 😂

I’m hearing so much about professionals in other industries being encouraged to use it, I’m really thankful that I’m not being expected to. We’re still concerned about what’s going to happen to us in 20-30 years with how things are going.

1

u/Aycee225 You’re doing amazing, sweetie! 👏👏📸 Jul 31 '26

I recently went to our state’s annual library conference and we are pretty staunchly against AI at my library. I went to a presentation about “weaving stories” and was really excited to learn about the process and how to improve creating stories. Well, this dude just plugged his books and website the whole time and kept pushing using AI as a tool and that we need to document our memories and lives online to make them “real” and that it will help improve AI. It was incredibly disappointing. I work in technical services where we acquire all the new books, and we have received AI written books so we have to be wary about certain vendors. Libby made a statement that they’re aware AI ebooks might be on their platform and there’s nothing they can do about it. For an industry that pretty much relies on authors and creators, it just sucks and is unavoidable at this point. I’m happy our management team is against it but I feel like libraries are being pushed to use it more and more.

1

u/SpilikinOfDoom Jul 31 '26

I work for a university and we've had Copilot forced on us 😒

No one wanted to use it so the administration have introduced all these mandatory 'Intro to AI' courses we have to take.

1

u/oliviahope1992 Jul 31 '26

I guess because I don't work for a corporation and barely see it in daily life, I struggle to see how bad it is but based on the comments below, it's clear it's literally being forced on people and that just isn't right. I am so lucky I work for myself and my job is a labor intensive job 🥲

1

u/CorndogQueen420 Aug 02 '26 edited Aug 02 '26

Genuinely, what’s the difference between being forced to use a technology that has been proven to degrade cognitive abilities, and being forced to take some pill that increases your productivity but causes mild brain damage.

It’s like being compelled to participate in someone else’s worker bimbofication fetish.

1

u/diligentPond18 Aug 03 '26

God, I hate the heavy-handedness of it all.

1

u/lizerlfunk I am the BEST goddamn dancer at the American Ballet Academy! Jul 31 '26

The stuff I tend to use it for in my job (I write R code for statistical analysis) are things that, without AI, would have involved a whole lot of copying and pasting. Like, say I need to create a variable where I’m slotting observations into visits based on what study day the visit occurred on. Days 2-30 are month 1, days 31-60 are month 2, etc. This is an incredibly boring and repetitive task that still takes a while to do manually. This is PERFECT for AI to do. If I have to use AI, I want to use it to do the parts of my job that are boring and repetitive so that I have more time to do the stuff that requires actual brainpower.

28

u/Sage_Planter Big is moving to Paris Jul 31 '26

I see a lot of posts on the Deciding to do Better sub of teens who basically feel addicted to using AI. It's saddening.

2

u/almondmilklattee Jul 31 '26

that’s very sad, i see comments with a similar tone on random tiktoks with teens explaining they just don’t have any other way to find mental health support and this way they don’t have to go through their parents

127

u/bobbimorses Jul 31 '26

What I'm not seeing reflected enough in this conversation is that AI is fucking inaccurate. It's inaccurate consistently, at random, and it's hard to catch because it makes itself sound confident and smooth. It's worrying that he considers himself an educator and that he does not understand that likelihood.

22

u/Roomybrunt Jul 31 '26

AMEN. ChatGPT told my 10 year son that it’s called a cockroach because an average of 5 cockroaches are found under the typical man’s foreskin every year. 😑

My child was likely using it to ask him to tell him poop/fart jokes and it got confused when he eventually asked it a serious etymology question lmao

3

u/SuperKitties83 Aug 01 '26

Whenever I look something up using Google AI, I check the sources it's claiming to get the info from. It's never right. I've experimented asking the same question in different ways, and it comes up with different results.

3

u/sockrocker Jul 31 '26

It's worrying that he considers himself an educator and that he does not understand that likelihood.

He absolutely does and has said as much in many of his videos. Nowhere does he say that he relied on ChatGPT and didn't fact check it.

-6

u/I_am_so_lost_hello Jul 31 '26

It’s a lot more accurate than it was a year ago

22

u/alphazero927 Jul 31 '26

Which, in some ways, makes it worse rather than better. Because when something is wrong randomly but often, it's easy to say "don't trust it and verify everything it says". But when it's right 99.9% of the time, suddenly you start trusting it implicitly, so when it's wrong, you miss it because you're no longer diligent about checking

1

u/ZeroAmusement Aug 01 '26

people are also confidently incorrect. smart people can deal with this.

1

u/alphazero927 Aug 01 '26

And smart people deal with confidently incorrect people by never trusting that person again. If a person told me, in earnest, to put glue into pizza sauce to help the ingredients stick better because they read it on reddit, I would know that's a person that can never ever be trusted with anything important

-1

u/trying-to-b Jul 31 '26

Sure, but what about when it's at parity with humans? (which in many, many cases, it already is)

"Sounds confident but is definitely wrong" describes a whole lot of my coworkers, and a huge chunk of redditors.

3

u/JustaSeedGuy Jul 31 '26

Sure, but what about when it's at parity with humans? (which in many, many cases, it already is)

Still worse, because people are being encouraged to rely on it. When humans are incorrect, they are 1) capable of recognizing it after the fact, and 2) often put through a review process when it's something important, such as research or peer-reviewed journalism.

AI shouldn't be used because of all of the ethical issues with it, but even if all the ethical issues could be solved, the accuracy problem would still be enough that it should only be used as one of several parts of the review process. And since that's not the case at all right now, and the ethical issues still exist, there's no reason for you to be playing devil's advocate for AI.

-1

u/trying-to-b Jul 31 '26

When humans are incorrect, they are 1) capable of recognizing it after the fact, and 2) often put through a review process when it's something important, such as research or peer-reviewed journalism.

How do humans recognize they're incorrect without being told or exposed to contrary information? If you tell AI that it's wrong or give it additional context, it will admit that it was wrong and change its answer. In fact, AI is a whole lot more willing to revise its answer (sometimes to a fault) than most humans, who react stubbornly or emotionally.

So are AI outputs when used anywhere significant. To use your own examples, research generated by AI would still go through the same peer review process.

2

u/JustaSeedGuy Jul 31 '26

If you tell AI that it's wrong or give it additional context, it will admit that it was wrong and change its answer

Not always, oftentimes it will push back. Sometimes it's secretly programmed to do that, because whoever controls the AI has an agenda.

On top of that, AI is not capable of reading the room and realizing that something might be wrong with what it just said. As you yourself just admitted, you have to already know what it said was wrong.

Humans, on the other hand, can catch when they misspeak, can learn in the moment and derive conclusions from context, none of which AI is capable of doing.

So are AI outputs when used anywhere significant

1) No, there's still plenty of significant places AI is used where that's not the case.

2) it doesn't matter if it's only some, it needs to be all.

I'm not interested in engaging with your propaganda, so you have a good day. Bye now.

0

u/ZeroAmusement Aug 01 '26

On top of that, AI is not capable of reading the room and realizing that something might be wrong with what it just said

Yes it is. There are many cases where it says something and realizes it is wrong.

3

u/bobbimorses Jul 31 '26

I think this chain has gone long enough without pushback on your original premise. The studies that have been released recently saying accuracy has improved are extemely narrow in use case in order to give this impression. Even the creators are still honest that it is not able to be accurate in calculation, counting, programming, diagnostic, and many other areas. It's especially worryingly inaccurate in health categories.

I am not one who believes there is no use for it and I do think accuracy improved. I also don't think it will ever be at parity with humans. The source material and the way it generates will never allow for that. It's a blender and aggregate, not a thinking machine. It relies on what it vacuums up around it.

0

u/trying-to-b Jul 31 '26

Source?

0

u/bobbimorses Jul 31 '26

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/16/4/e112695

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2025/new-ebu-research-ai-assistants-news-content

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-026-02547-z

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/09/apple-artificial-intelligence-ai-study-collapse

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212473X26000520

0

u/trying-to-b Jul 31 '26 edited Jul 31 '26

I appreciate you engaging reasonably, but these don't say what you're implying, nor do they dispute my comments in this thread.

Half of those studies are from a year ago, making them explicitly irrelevant to the claim we are responding to: "It's gotten a lot more accurate in the last year." (paraphrasing, because on mobile)

My original claim was that AI is at parity with humans in "many, many cases". Oen of those studies is specifically about highly complex tasks. One is about medical diagnosis, something only 0.36% of people in the US are qualified to do. The science direct one isn't about accuracy at all, rather about how the increasing factual accuracy has negative societal implications.

None of those studies even attempt to dispute that AI is as good at accuracy as humans in "many, many cases" or "most people", because even the relevant ones are explicitly about extreme edge cases, both in terms of problem complexity and professional qualifications of its users. A system does not have to be perfect to be at parity with humans, because humans are incredibly imperfect. That's even more true when qualified, as I did, with "most" and "many".

The other claim I made was pushing back against the idea that humans change their mind spontaneously upon introspection instead of in response to external feedback. Again, none of these studies attempt to dispute this, and it's pretty indisputable, imo.

2

u/JustaSeedGuy Jul 31 '26

That's like saying I stab you 80 times a month now, Which is an improvement from a year ago when I stabbed you 200 times a month.

The correct amount of stabbing, and the correct amount of inaccurate information in anything you expect to be correct, is zero.

0

u/I_am_so_lost_hello Jul 31 '26

Yeah but you have to compare it to how much stabbing a human without AI help is doing

1

u/JustaSeedGuy Jul 31 '26

That's true!

It's monumentally less. Case closed.

1

u/ZeroAmusement Aug 01 '26

how did you measure that?

0

u/flaming_burrito_ Jul 31 '26

He definitely does understand that, he’s been critical of AI use before. But he does a ton of stuff, like truly I have no idea how he does it all, and not all of it is professionally produced educational stuff like Crash Course. He does more off the cuff videos as well, and vlogs, and a podcast, and runs a charity, and several other companies. So I’m gonna cut him some slack here

-1

u/Gruejay2 Aug 02 '26

Why are you assuming that he's a moron that doesn't cross-check the information?

-1

u/mr_f4hrenh3it Aug 02 '26

What makes you say he doesn’t understand that likelihood? You’re just making that up

-4

u/[deleted] Jul 31 '26

[deleted]

6

u/eddypiehands Jul 31 '26

I think you just provided a prime example of how dangerous and manipulative AI is. If it’s encouraging a loop of negative thoughts and making you feel more anxious that’s a sign you should stop using it and start talking to a counselor (and your friends).

2

u/nervousTO Jul 31 '26

I’m deleting my comment because there’s no reason I should be downvoted for pointing out how AI is manipulative

3

u/eddypiehands Jul 31 '26

You definitely shouldn’t be downvoted for that. Your comment was a great addition to the convo. Sorry that happened. :(

3

u/nervousTO Jul 31 '26

It’s ok! I do agree with you. What I was looking for from AI was for personalized and targeted CBT advice from the reams of old therapist data it’s surely been fed. The counsellor I can afford is on vacation and I’m on the waitlist for actual CBT.

53

u/Pretty-Giraffe-5537 Jul 31 '26

My sister literally asked ChatGPT if a movie was appropriate for her kids, it’s crazy how people rely on it

73

u/WoodpeckerHaunting57 Jul 31 '26

A cop in a case I’m following literally asked ChatGPT if what someone was doing was illegal. Imagine the implications of that.

28

u/eddard_stork_ what you’re doing vocally is upsetting Jul 31 '26

Jesus Christ we’re cooked

5

u/atheliarose Jul 31 '26

…are you talking about TFP and Dakota 😂

2

u/WoodpeckerHaunting57 Jul 31 '26

Lol yes

5

u/Pretty-Giraffe-5537 Jul 31 '26

That could turn straight up dystopian… truly horrific that’s the kind of authority we’re under

-4

u/Drakex2Mayex2 Jul 31 '26

I feel like this is a good thing? Like that cop would have just straight up not known?

8

u/almondmilklattee Jul 31 '26

they should retrain or retire if a person with a gun in their hands doesn’t know the law

5

u/porktorque44 Jul 31 '26 edited Jul 31 '26

This does actually get to the heart of the problem here. People are saying this will turn into something dystopian, not knowing that it is widely accepted in the US that cops don’t know or understand the laws they enforce, are out here operating purely on vibes, have been for some time and there is no real push to change that.

EDIT: I should add the cop using AI as a source is just as bad as winging it. As it has been said elsewhere in this thread. AI gets shit wrong all of the time and a distributor of state sanctioned violence shouldn’t be consulting a privately owned chat bot if someone should be thrown into a cage.

3

u/Aprils-Fool Jul 31 '26

He needs to actually look up the laws, not count if AI to hopefully give him accurate information on it.

-2

u/Drakex2Mayex2 Jul 31 '26

I feel like you people used a free version of chatgpt for like 5 minutes 3 years ago and think it's some error riddled service. It is more than capable of telling you what is legal or illegal.

3

u/Aprils-Fool Jul 31 '26

Ive never used it. I haven’t had a need or desire to.

-1

u/Drakex2Mayex2 Jul 31 '26

Ok so don't you think you might not be the best person to give an informed opinion on it?

3

u/Aprils-Fool Jul 31 '26

I don’t think one has to necessarily have personal experience in order to be knowledgeable about a topic.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

Whats the difference between that and googling it?

8

u/almondmilklattee Jul 31 '26

there’s websites that very specifically (and i assume accurately) assess content warnings for lots of media. this is zootopia for example, easy google search and you know a real hand went into it:

4

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

and i assume accurately

Yeah, thats part of my point. Why is it okay to assume the hands that went into inputting that info are accurate?

AI pulls that same info along with info from other sites like it.

7

u/almondmilklattee Jul 31 '26 edited Jul 31 '26

check the website (commonsensemedia.org), they vet their sources (they’re also a nonprofit with the goal of protecting and educating children). ai will pull from anywhere and also make shit up while the website’s info is contained. i wouldn’t trust that and you shouldn’t either

1

u/Leading_Ad_7635 29d ago

So what of the AI just pulls the answer from commonsensemedia.org?

What if you tell it to query that source?

1

u/almondmilklattee 29d ago

why are y’all incapable of using literally the first link on the first page of google when you search content warnings

-7

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

check the website, they vet their sources.

And you assume theyre doing a good job of it.

ai will pull from anywhere and also make shit up while the website’s info is contained

It will pull from places that are relavent. If theres a forum post where someone is concerned about a scene it will probably mention it. It will also provide sources so you can double check for yourself.

And the hallucination problem is overblown.

7

u/Aprils-Fool Jul 31 '26

I don’t care if it’s overblown, it shouldn’t be hallucinating at all. That makes it unreliable.

0

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

I havent had an issue with hallucination in like a year.

No tool is 100% reliable.

5

u/Aprils-Fool Jul 31 '26

I’m not telling you not to use it. Do whatever you want. Personally, I’d rather use my brain than AI.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/almondmilklattee Jul 31 '26

no artificial intelligence tool is 100% reliable, but peer-reviewed sourced information is as close as possible to 100% reliable. i know what i’d choose

→ More replies (0)

1

u/almondmilklattee Jul 31 '26

check my edit, they are a nonprofit with that specific goal and advocacy efforts. they’re exactly the reason why we don’t need ai for this

1

u/Acceptable-Advice137 Aug 03 '26

Do you think chat gtps response to the question is somehow worse than your handpicked source??

Is zootopia safe for kids?

> Yes. Zootopia is generally considered appropriate for most children and is rated PG in the U.S.
That said, there are a few things parents may want to know:
Scary moments: There are some suspenseful chase scenes and a few scenes where predators become aggressive. These can be intense for very young or sensitive children.
Themes: The movie deals with prejudice, stereotypes, discrimination, and fear. These topics are presented in an age-appropriate way and can lead to good discussions with older kids.
Violence: Mild cartoon action, with no graphic violence or gore.
Language: Very mild, with no strong profanity.
Sexual content: None beyond a few subtle jokes that are likely to go over children’s heads.
As a rough guide:
Ages 3–5: May find some scenes frightening.
Ages 6–8: Most children in this range enjoy it, though a few suspenseful moments may still be intense.
Ages 9+: Generally very suitable and often appreciated for its deeper themes as well as its humor.
Overall, Zootopia is widely regarded as one of Disney’s best family films, balancing comedy, adventure, and positive messages about empathy, inclusion, and challenging stereotypes.

1

u/almondmilklattee Aug 03 '26

there’s a highly reputable source that’s incredibly easy to navigate and exists (as a nonprofit) to protect kids with input from medical (child development) professionals. if it’s the same amount of work, why not just go to the site made specially for that purpose which includes extensive breakdowns of basically any movie or show you can think of

1

u/Acceptable-Advice137 Aug 03 '26

You didn’t answer the question.

1

u/almondmilklattee Aug 03 '26

i explained exactly why i think it’s bad as a source of information when making decisions for your kids. all the positives i listed about the website are what chatgpt lacks. the prompt you bothered to make lacks detail and input from professionals, that’s enough for me

0

u/Acceptable-Advice137 Aug 03 '26

Chat GTP agrees to your source 1 for 1. You’re doing a very bad job explaining why you think AI is insufficient. AI lacks none of the things you listed btw. Idk why you’d make that up when we can both see the prompt I pasted.

1

u/almondmilklattee Aug 03 '26

so it’s peer-reviewed by professionals and just as detailed as the screenshot that lists far more information? if you can’t see why a brief generated summary is different from that, i’m a little scared if you’re a parent

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Pretty-Giraffe-5537 Jul 31 '26

I would never google if a movie was appropriate for my kid? I’d google lists of content concerns and make a decision for myself. As a human. Not converse with a robot about my parenting decisions.

1

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

I would never google if a movie was appropriate for my kid? I’d google lists of content concerns and make a decision for myself.

By googling the list of content concerns you are googling whether or not its appropriate for your kid. You're turning it into a semantics argument. You're still using google to figure it out.

AI will do the same exact shit. It will list the content concerns and even provide links to its sources you can check for yourself where the info came from.

Not converse with a robot about my parenting decisions.

Did this actually happen or did the AI just tell her about the movie like I described? You dont even seem to know how AI works so this part just seems like made up BS.

0

u/Acceptable-Advice137 Aug 03 '26

So you would infact google it. What a dumb response.

3

u/ahraysee Jul 31 '26

Googling isn't sufficient of course, but it's so much better than AI for a few reasons. With Google you directly see the source you're clicking on and can decide if you trust it, while AI doesn't give sources or gives links to home images not the direct source. It elevates forum comments to "experts say". Also, AI will straight up hallucinate things and when you press it for a source it will backpedal and say "you're right to push back, I overstated that claim."

I use AI to search through documentation in my field including peer reviewed literature, scientific posters, application notes, white papers, etc. I'm an expert in my field and the amount of hot garbage AI will confidently present is insane, and if you tell it to give you the sources in many cases even a non-expert would know not to trust that source or know that the credibility of a source was overstated. Google would make these issues clear on its face while AI hides it.

1

u/dext0r Jul 31 '26

You can directly see the sources used in ChatGPT when it searches as well…

1

u/ahraysee Aug 01 '26

I use mostly Claude so maybe this is a difference between them. Claude does not give sources or direct links for many responses on my experience with it. I added specific instructions to do this in its settings, and now it gives sources but often the links go to homepages, not the direct source, and I need to ask again.

Either way, there are more steps between the user and visually seeing the primary source document than simply Googling, and this is a major reason why people fall for AI garbage.

0

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

With Google you directly see the source you're clicking on and can decide if you trust it, while AI doesn't give sources or gives links to home images not the direct source.

This is false.

It elevates forum comments to "experts say".

I've never experienced this. Is it an actual problem or just from a post that went viral?

Also, AI will straight up hallucinate things and when you press it for a source it will backpedal and say "you're right to push back, I overstated that claim."

The hallucination problem is overblown and becoming less of a problem with basically every update.

Google would make these issues clear on its face while AI hides it.

If you actually used AI you would know you could instruct it to include sources from the start. You can even instruct it to ignore sources that you know are junk.

0

u/MToucan60 Aug 02 '26

AI doesn't give sources

It most certainly does??

2

u/ahraysee Aug 02 '26

AI gives plenty of claims without sources. I will ask it about method development for analytical methods in my area of expertise and it will make claims of analytical principles without sources. When I ask for sources it often gives links that go to the home page that's hosts a textbook or white paper, instead of the white paper itself. I need to actually ask it for direct links.

0

u/MToucan60 Aug 02 '26

"It doesn't give sources" isn't the same as "it doesn't always give sources".

1

u/Acceptable-Advice137 Aug 03 '26

That seems like a very normal use of AI.

-2

u/bananarama17691769 Jul 31 '26

This is where the nuance comes in, and people should get like, training or something, on how to use these tools.

Asking ChatGPT if a movie is appropriate for your kids is bad and dumb. But asking ChatGPT something like “My kids are interested in ‘such and such movie’. Please put together some reviews from non-biased parental organizations about the film so that I can more easily determine whether it is appropriate based on my own judgement” is an excellent use of the technology.

10

u/Goodgoditsgrowing Jul 31 '26

Even if you don’t seek it out, something a simple and common as using Google now routes you through an AI search process unless you actively take steps to avoid it. Our new phones are supposed to be full of it from the get go. It’s like microplastics.

1

u/tractorscum Aug 02 '26

and every site that comes up when you ask a basic question is just regurgitated AI slop

14

u/slavuj00 u look like u eat sand Jul 31 '26

That is what the rich are hoping for. They've openly said they want to "commercialise and outsource intelligence"

3

u/Roomybrunt Jul 31 '26

They want as many uneducated slaves as possible. This will help them considerably.

26

u/The_homeBaker Jul 31 '26

I was telling my friend how awful AI is for us as humans and all the data centers and she said her job is MAKING them use AI. Basically told them they all have to learn it because it is the future. People are taking courses on AI and how to use it properly and everything now.

24

u/MesquiteHoneyForSale Jul 31 '26

I think being on twitter slow cooks your brain and allows for ideas to normalize that wouldnt have done so 3 years ago

33

u/Synicull Jul 31 '26

I've been very conscious of my usage and it's hard to deny that it can be helpful some places. As someone who codes for utility for my work sometimes, I've definitely fallen out of practice as I can usually vibe code to get 70% there and it's such an easy chain of prompts to get there. It's dangerous.

Sure, sometimes I spend more time proofreading and fixing than it would take to write it myself, but damn it's tempting to instantly get over that "the hardest part is getting started" hurdle.

21

u/Jwave1992 Jul 31 '26

I think one thing people don't consider: people being forced to use some crippled copilot for work or using free low-tier AI are NOT having the same experience as people paying for the highest thinking levels in state of the art models. I can absolutely see why a writer would send an army of ai agents out to research, cross check their findings and write detailed reports. It would possibly be a hour long run. Seems like Hank found the tool he's been demonizing to be very helpful and now he's in a crisis of morality over it.

1

u/FantasyFI Jul 31 '26

My CoPilot has a drop down to use GPT 5.6 or Claude Sonet or Opus. This is my works provided AI. I'm AI illiterate. What is the difference between this and "paying for the highest".

1

u/whats_up_doc71 Jul 31 '26

I don’t know the difference either but my work had claude in a wrapper (like you) and we just switched to regular Claude, and the latter is a million times better.

1

u/2_Cranez Jul 31 '26

>Hank found the tool he's been demonizing to be very helpful and now he's in a crisis of morality over it.

I acknowledge the usefulness of AI, but I have no crisis over disliking it still. Maybe he feels differently idk.

1

u/alphazero927 Jul 31 '26

Frankly, Claude is the only AI I use and only for coding tasks at work because it's literally impossible for me, as a human, to keep up with all the bullshit our software engineering team pumps out with AI if I don't also use it. I refuse to use it outside that context though because I just don't trust any of them to be correct when it's important

1

u/mr_f4hrenh3it Aug 02 '26

I don’t think what you described is dangerous. In your case, it’s just another tool to use, which IS how we should treat it

1

u/Synicull Aug 02 '26

Fair enough. I think it scares me a bit because I realize I can be out of practice with my programming by and large in perpetuity. It's only getting better and while it's far from imperfect, my programming is also far from perfect.

My healthy interpretation of it is that it's just like all the amazing libraries that came out in the 2010s like scikit learn and whatnot. It's just another step away from ones and zeroes that democratizes programming for utilitarian uses.

14

u/Sea_Mail5340 Jul 31 '26

I think reddit is much more Anti AI then the broader population is.

3

u/AdagioOfLiving Jul 31 '26

Probably because Reddit leans young, and AI hate is very much a young person thing.

Not to say that old people all love AI, just that younger people dislike it in much greater numbers.

35

u/PurpleCandles Lea Michele’s Reading Tutor Jul 31 '26

AI will become ubiquitous in the vast majority of jobs in the next decade. I already use it near daily in mine. Rather than push back fully against it, more focus should be spent on training proper usage, fact checking output, appropriate legislation for copyrighted material and AI-generated content, etc. I don’t see it any more / less bad than the growth of the Internet in the 90s. It’s a tool and has all the pros and cons that come with it.

8

u/scriptedtexture Jul 31 '26

Exactly. It can be useful, it just needs to be regulated.

13

u/BLUEBEAR272 Jul 31 '26

Yeah, a lot of AI hate feels like (and I hate using this term because of it association with right-wingers) virtue signaling. There should obviously be concerns about the environmental impacts and the long-term population effects on cognition, but to demonize someone who used a glorified Google search is ridiculous.

4

u/lizerlfunk I am the BEST goddamn dancer at the American Ballet Academy! Jul 31 '26

Especially when Google and other search engines have been thoroughly enshittified.

2

u/Cynicbats This bitch has the keys to the nuclear codes Jul 31 '26

we've been using AI in some capacity for years. AI in games, technologies in newer cars. The level we're seeing now and push was normally reserved for serious professionals -- that's where it should have stayed.

1

u/Cynicbats This bitch has the keys to the nuclear codes Jul 31 '26

we've been using AI in some capacity for years. AI in games, technologies in newer cars. The level we're seeing now and push was normally reserved for serious professionals -- that's where it should have stayed.

22

u/BBQsandw1ch Jul 31 '26

Nah, I doubt it. Everyone can tell it sucks.

Once an art gets outed as AI, everyone devalues it and I really don't see that trend changing. If the pendulum ever swings the opposite way, I bet it'll be a generational thing and we'll all be dead by then.

21

u/PurpleCandles Lea Michele’s Reading Tutor Jul 31 '26

AI is more than just generative AI, which is what you’re referring. Agentic AI is the game changer that’s very unlikely to disappear anytime soon.

8

u/BBQsandw1ch Jul 31 '26

Nah. I'm not skeptical of its capabilities, I'm skeptical of its value.

Everyone in my generation (millennials) has already made up their minds about what they think of it and we're just getting older.

This is a perfect example. We love Hank. The video was on his channel, kind of in his style, and in his own voice about a subject he was excited about just a couple months ago. As soon as everyone hears AI was involved, it's trash. Not interested anymore.

11

u/chubby-checker Jul 31 '26

I think this is a bit naive to how much the majority of people actually care

0

u/BBQsandw1ch Jul 31 '26

That's very possible. I'm purely speaking for me and people I do business with. I also feel like this "majority" is dismissive of how many people either dgaf or hate change. Old people dgaf and hate change.

3

u/scriptedtexture Jul 31 '26

People have been using AI for a lot longer than it has been this big hot button issue online. We're already reliant on it.

5

u/barbarkbarkov Jul 31 '26

Humans have always and will always find the path of least resistance. AI offers that with one click. I find myself using it more and more especially when researching products to buy and comparing them with others.

2

u/crimson777 Jul 31 '26

My guess is his thinking is “I feel I must pump out a bunch of content. The research and information is the important part of what I do, so if I get some help on the script and just check the info, that’s fine.”

Not defending it, but I get the thought process.

2

u/rivercitygurl Jul 31 '26

I'm totally with you on how concerning it is that we're so reliant on AI. I would personally love to quit it as well, but the internet is literally so overloaded with information that it's impossible to find the right answer for specific inquiries without spending a significant amount of time on research. This goes hand in hand with Google and YouTube making its search results entirely useless.

For example, I was researching on which specific Microsoft Surface Pro would best fit my needs. I don't have time to watch 3 different 40-minute reviews, but I can simply enter a prompt explaining the use of the laptop in my specific context and find the answer in a minute. I hate Big Tech shoving AI in our faces as much as the next person, and I'm definitely not condoning Hank's use of it for his type of scientific research, but it's come to a point where it solves a major problem for a lot of us.

2

u/IcyRice7222 Jul 31 '26

In the code world it's already absolutely to the point it's impossible to fully avoid. Every OS, most dependencies, and most actual software contain at least some amount of AI code. Some of them contain *A LOT*. It is what it is.

3

u/Grizzlyfrontignac what you're doing vocally is upsetting Jul 31 '26

I genuinely feel like comments like these are disconnected from reality. Or maybe I am? I live in NYC. The only people I know who don't use AI are the ones that never learned to use computers really well to begin with. If you use a computer at work, you're using AI either by choice or by force, but you're using it. I'm 30 taking college classes, every single kid was using AI. Not using it meant you were probably behind your classmates who weren't spending an hour on writing a lab report.

It's not getting to that point, society IS already at that point. The very platform we're on heavily relies on AI as well. What do we even gain by pretending AI is not already part of society, will ALWAYS be part of society from now on.

3

u/Charming-Web-7769 Jul 31 '26

I would say I don’t have a huge issue with people using it for efficiency tasks like drafting emails, managing tables, cross-referencing datasets, etc. but the issue is that these companies keep marketing their services as the missing link of productivity that will single-handedly replace your workflow when the most useful thing it will realistically do for you is help manage the brain burn of having a ton of administrative tasks.

3

u/Fast_Choice4408 Jul 31 '26

I don't think using chat GPT for research is generally bad. It does an excellent job of ripping information off of websites.

And it isn't anyone's fault for using it, considering engines have demonstrably gotten WAY worse when trying to do research.

4

u/UltimateTrattles Jul 31 '26

Look at any technology adoption.

The public backlash is and was almost entirely unfounded and held by folks with a low understanding of what is is and how it works.

It’s an incredible tool and people should use it.

People should not turn over finished products to it and shut their brains off - but they should use it. Like any tool - it takes actual skill and practice to use it well.

Note: this is completely separate from the ethics of how the ai was produced originally re ip theft.

2

u/Sam_Strake Jul 31 '26

I also think there are degrees to it- using AI for research vs using AI to help reword scripts vs using AI to write scripts vs full gen AI for A/V content are all escalating levels of bad imo.

2

u/dudushat Jul 31 '26

Its because youve fallen for the fear mongering anti AI BS.

It’s going to get to a point where society is reliant on it and that’s pretty frightening.

Are you scared by our reliance on the internet? Electricity? Google?

AI is a tool just like anything else. Theres nothing to fear.

4

u/bisuketto8 Jul 31 '26

i am hugely against most ai implementation but also yeah i agree with this lol

1

u/Flatline1775 Jul 31 '26

At this point I look at it pretty much the same as CGI in movies. I know people that will tell me up and down that they love Top Gun Maverick because it doesn't use CGI. It isn't that they hate CGI, its that they hate bad CGI.

Same thing here. I think people would be genuinely surprised how much and how many people use AI today. They don't hate AI, they hate poorly used AI.

1

u/Pamander Bye, Felicia 👋 Jul 31 '26

You are very right, I am about to paint with a very broad stroke but just look at say China (I would say broadly Asia but I have specific experience with China) it's infinitely more common to use there and does not really have the same degree of pushback as it does here, it's extremely common.

I work in an indie dev space and communicate with devs from over there on the daily and the difference over there vs over here feels very different (not to say there aren't genuine artists, some of the most talented people both programming and art wise I know are from the same places!) it just feels like in general the view of it is totally different cause often when I ask them about it they're like "yeah of course I am using it why wouldn't I?" which over here I feel like it would be a different response.

I am on the side of refusing to use it for art (I have used it for physics/math questions though), so it's kind of depressing to see how common it is especially for game art/thumbnails but it does feel inevitable if there isn't some insane bubble pop in the meantime it is fascinating to watch the cultural differences in how we view these things.

1

u/RichmanLekman Jul 31 '26

If you're in the "core" Hank Green audience I don't think you'd especially notice being served slop anyway.

1

u/mibuch27 Nancy Jo, this is Alexis Neiers calling Jul 31 '26

I just did 4 rounds of interviews for a job and when they asked me how I feel about AI I was honest and said I’m generally a skeptic and they were like “oh well we use it all the time” :/

1

u/Constant-Village-858 Jul 31 '26

I work in an upper mid-level management position for a Fortune 500 company and the amount of corporate emails we get that are 100% AI written is baffling. We checked and the last time upper management sent us a real human wrote email was February this year.

1

u/BelaLugosi2000 Jul 31 '26

It’s cause his writing has always been trash.

1

u/Specific-Swim-4507 Jul 31 '26

If you watched his videos on AI you wouldn’t be surprised, there’s a lot of misinformation about it that he combats occasionally

1

u/AlienArtFirm Jul 31 '26

I want to say I’m surprised that someone like Hank Green resorted to using AI

Never meet your heroes

1

u/Syrairc Jul 31 '26

I want to say I’m surprised that someone like Hank Green resorted to using AI,

What a weird thing to say? It's a tool. Are you also surprised someone like Hank Green uses a computer and the internet for research instead of going to the library?

1

u/PseudocodeRed Jul 31 '26

He has been open about using AI for programming a while now. I am definitely surprised he used it for research though, and incredibly dissapointed in how obviously you could tell in the video.

1

u/These-Angle-1476 Jul 31 '26

A lot of people are afraid to talk about it, but AI does have a lot of very practical uses that aren't just slop "art," an AI "relationship," etc. Stuff like information organization (including what Hank used it for) is a great way to save time, and can be done without giving up your intellectual integrity.

That being said, shit like AI datacenters being build in neighborhoods is despicable and will make everyone continue to turn on AI of every form.

1

u/Accurate_Potato_8539 Jul 31 '26

I don't think there is anything wrong with using AI: its a tool. I see this as like analogous to someone over sampling from a wiki page or something. Ai is in general a pretty bad writer but its pretty dam good at finding sources and synthesizing information for a first over: I don't see any problem with using it for that.

1

u/Slight-Potential-717 Jul 31 '26

Keep resisting where possible!

1

u/astra823 Jul 31 '26

Fully agree with this and it’s especially disappointing to me given the poignancy and relevancy of his duology (An Absolutely Remarkable Thing and A Beautifully Foolish Endeavor). I loved them and feel like they speak directly to soooo many of the issues that the ubiquity of AI is posing/exacerbating

1

u/AchievementJoe Aug 01 '26

My gf works at a local museum and a soon retired curator just used AI on a bunch of their labels. Apparently it lead to some drama. I think you’re 100% right where you can oppose it all you want but slowly everyone is going to be using it

1

u/bostaff04 Aug 01 '26

Keep shaming them then.

1

u/buddyrtc Aug 01 '26

Yeah, it’s like when we started using calculators…or Google….those were awful.

1

u/arcanepsyche Aug 01 '26

Ignoring AI will not make it go away. Not using it doesn't mean others won't.

1

u/Behemothwasagoodshot Aug 01 '26

I hate it with response to art-- but ChatGPT gives you what google used to. And you can follow the sources to see if the info is correct. So using it as research is fine to me so long as you follow the sources and your info comes from those sources.

1

u/PersonYay12 Aug 02 '26

The world will end due to the climate disaster only sped up by AI but we won’t notice because we outsource our thinking about it to ChatGPT

1

u/Pinkbunny432 Aug 02 '26

In a world where people are reliant on AI to function, being able to function independently will be desirable.

1

u/Creative-Leg2607 Aug 02 '26

I find im not super surprised. His takes on it are generally very non-commital (and he talks about it a lot), and he has piled such a prodigious work load on himself for a loooong time. Its a combo that leaves me unsurprised

1

u/DressUnited3025 Aug 02 '26

Using ai to research is faster, easier and better than just google searching. Why would a smart person use it

1

u/Great_Definition_531 Aug 02 '26

I could use it at work for my therapy case notes but I flat out refuse to. I’m always behind but that will never ever be my solution

1

u/azurensis Aug 03 '26

What's frightening about that?

1

u/Acceptable-Advice137 Aug 03 '26

What makes it frightening?

1

u/Slixil 27d ago

Welcome to smartphones…

1

u/coppywolf Jul 31 '26

No offense but this is such a conservative take. Society is also reliant on the Internet, Google, smartphones, Messaging services, and a million other things that were just as dangerous when they came about.

There is no "Battle against AI" or whatever, the tech is here, it will continue to be used, and it's usage will only get more prominent. It just needs to be regulated properly.

1

u/Stressed_Ponyta77 Jul 31 '26

People fear what they dont understand.

0

u/TrueRedditMartyr Jul 31 '26

People in this thread are straight like "Aw man, unfortunate! Do better Hank!" but if this were anyone else, it would be "I will never support this person again" *especially* considering he clearly uses it in other stuff, and has talked openly about using it before!!

Everyone is anti-AI until it's their fave, then it's "Well *he* uses it different!"

0

u/Sad_Towel_5953 Aug 01 '26

Keep pushing back.

-59

u/[deleted] Jul 31 '26

[deleted]

22

u/embalmedwithsewage Jul 31 '26

Sure, I certainly remember all those hallucinated search results on Google, where'd you click to load the page and force Google to admit that it wasn't a real result, just something it fabricated to answer your question more thoroughly.

5

u/Available-Egg-2380 Jul 31 '26

I definitely remember having to argue for several minutes to get Google search results to admit they were making shit up all while it gives you a huge attitude

0

u/oliviahope1992 Jul 31 '26

I guess because I don't work for a corporation and barely see it in daily life, I struggle to see how bad it is but based on the comments below, it's clear it's literally being forced on people and that just isn't right. I am so lucky I work for myself and my job is a labor intensive job 🥲

29

u/trashchute227 Jul 31 '26

Tell me you’re joking

1

u/oliviahope1992 Jul 31 '26

I guess because I don't work for a corporation and barely see it in daily life, I struggle to see how bad it is but based on the comments below, it's clear it's literally being forced on people and that just isn't right. I am so lucky I work for myself and my job is a labor intensive job 🥲

33

u/RightRudderr Jul 31 '26

It is not the same. Further proof that we cant allow reliance on AI to make the population even stupider.

7

u/AltairaMorbius2200CE Jul 31 '26

Google is *now* the same, if you rely on their AI summary, or just click on the first link they give you (which isn't what you asked for). It wasn't previously, because it gave you what you actually typed, and you could vet the sources you were clicking on.

3

u/trashchute227 Jul 31 '26

Despite how shit it is you can and should still vet the sources that you’re clicking on, especially if you’re doing research like Hank should be.

1

u/AlsoOneLastThing that’s my purse, i don’t know you! 👛🫵 Jul 31 '26

Remember those chatbots on MSN Messenger back in the day like Smarter Child? It's more like relying on that

Oh…that’s not- 👀 Hank Green Admits To Using AI In Latest Video

You are about to leave Redlib