https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_c6MWk7PQc
You might guess that I'm a little apprehensive about this one. Any amount of "actually this might not be the most important thing to focus on" can be interpreted these days as an unacceptable defense of AI or whatever, but I just felt like it was a good opportunity to talk about lifecycle and resources use analysis and how freaking tricky the are!!
It's a good video, and I recommend watching it.
He did a good job with this video (much better than his earlier AI videos). For anyone interested in reading further on the topic which mirrors much of what Hank says in this video, I'd recommend Andy Masley's post here https://andymasley.substack.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake
Meanwhile, Adam (the one who Ruins Everything) is still trying to wish AI out of existence with increasing shrillness.
I was told by none other than Ed Zitron himself to “eat his ass” when I suggested that his incessant, hyperbolic approach to “discussions” had all the hallmarks of emotional manipulation, you know, the kind of thing that populists do when people push on the arguments.
Lucky for me I figured out Adam Conover was full of shit years ago. Turns out comedians aren’t great sources of accurate information, even if they have a bachelor’s degree in philosophy.
Okay but I'm still listening to Brennan Lee Mulligan about birds
Loved the guy. But the misconceptions about AI were too off the roof...
He jumped the shark a long time ago.
Sounds like Saberspark, too
He knows what his largely liberal American audience wants to hear and I'm sure that reflects his beliefs as well but he has enough respect for data and academic honesty to not let that completely sway his presentation of the facts which you have to respect.
He's a product of the 90s. "Liberal" meant something then other than just "person I disagree with". We understand that not only is it dishonest to lie in order to push your own position, it also absolutely shreds the credibility of your entire side.
Liberal means something different basically every 20-30 years
Absolutely. If you call Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan a liberal in 2025 you are going to get some really confused looks.
You would have gotten the same confused looks in the 1980s. One of George H. W. Bush's talking points against Michael Dukakkis in 1988 was "that man is a liberal!", to which he responded "Yes, I am a liberal."
Liberal/conservative has almost nothing to do with AI. And if it did, if anything conservatives would be against AI, as a conservative position is one that wants return to an older time or policy or status quo, while liberal positions are more open to trying new things. But barely aligns in reality.
It doesn't correlate precisely but there are more liberal/progressive influencers which are against AI than there are conservative influencers. AI ultimately threatens capitalism but in the short term it accelerates it and being against AI regulation promotes nationalist interests. The left is more concerned about worker's rights and environmental issues and is thus more likely to be opposed to AI. You can disagree with my assessment but saying that AI has little interplay with partisan politics seems very disconnected from reality. There are plenty of people on the left that use and support AI but promoting it is very hazardous to your career as a leftist creator whereas there is far more open usage of AI on the right.
Whether you are "left or right" is about your positions, not just what you decide to call yourself.
if you support a new avante garde technology that wildly breaks from tradition and status quo, you are taking a liberal stance on an issue. I don't care what label you choose, you just are anyway.
Your other positions may be conservative, but you're liberal on that issue still, and if the same is true of enough other topics, then the person is just a liberal or a moderate, whether they like it or admit it or not.
To anyone who might find it interesting: here is a well thought out and funny video about how technology maps to the political spectrum: https://youtu.be/FHFcTxR2KUY?si=qTe-T9dkn8uX5ShL
Is Marc Andreesen a liberal?
On the topic of AI's outlook, yes. For the reason I just explained above. On other topics, no. Fun fact: people can have both liberal and conservative beliefs at the same time.
So you believe his support of AI comes from the liberal, progressive, beneficent part and not the scammy, greedy, right-wing part?
There's nothing "scammy" about it, so that didn't make any sense, so yes.
There’s nothing scammy about Marc Andreesen and AI? Maybe you’re thinking of a different guy.
No, there's nothing scammy about AI. Full stop end of sentence.
There may be something scammy about Marc Andreesen. But if so, that doesn't indicate any sort of connection to AI in particular.
Liberals are against AI, conservatives tend to be for.
Don’t know why you guys will swear up and down that you’re anti-AI and this dovetails exactly with your politics on other issues like the environment or anti-capitalism, but when someone ties the word for your political movement to anti-AI you run away with your tail between your legs.
Would love an explanation for that behaviour.
I don't know what you're yapping about, but it wasn't a meaningful reply to my comment. As I just explained, and as you completely ignored, if anything, AI is a liberal thing to be for, by definition. It's new, it's not traditional, it's not the status quo, so it's not conservative.
(But since it's not strongly related to any classic social movements or pre-existing culture, it's still not strongly liberal. Just slightly liberal.)
Yes, liberal or left wing politics being anti-technology is politically incoherent, and yet that doesn’t stop the current anti-AI movement from being mostly liberals and leftists.
(It’s really about inter-elite competition and liberals who see themselves as defenders of the establishment trying to protect a sclerotic, gerontocratic and failing political elite from being replaced by the rising power and wealth of the new tech elite, just as the current political elite displaced the old WASP aristocracy in the 1960s who’d been running the country since it’s founding.)
Yes it does "stop them" from being that way, because having that opinion by definition MAKES them conservative on the issue. Calling them liberal still is just you using labels incorrectly, not some mystery of the cosmos/society
All people against AI are conservatives WRT AI, so 0% of them are "liberals against AI"
I think it's easier to say they would personally identify as leftist/liberal but act reactionary on this one issue - antis are interesting in that they're using very liberal activist language and tactics for a right-wing cause.
The shorthand of this is "leftists and liberals are largely anti-AI, while fewer conservatives are", don't see why you have a problem with that statement.
I’d be defensive and have a bunch of disclaimers too in his position
Some antis are legitimately insane and emotionally volatile people
I think if it were shown that water issue were significant, most pro-AI people would just say: "Ah, ok, then we need to make sure data centers are built in more sustainable locations and climates, and invest more in cooling solutions that require less water. This may very slightly slow down AI development or increase costs. We'll live."
If you keep your facts straight, I don't think anyone pro-AI is going to bite your head off. And as for whether anything is "worth it", sure, reasonable people can disagree. I personally value AI a lot more than golf or Californian almonds, but I know a golf coach who'd probably disagree.
Good point from him, on how much water we use on something truly useless: Front lawns.
So yeah, as we know everything uses "a lot" of water and electricity. And AI will as well. And that's OK.
It's a better video than most, but that's a very low bar. I really wish we'd just acknowledge that "OMG, we're using a lot of power!" isn't some new revelation or specific to AI. Yes, modern society is power-hungry. Yes, we need better global policies on power usage. But they need to be universal policies, not just "here's something new we can attack."
Or he might just recognize that far more of his audience is against AI than for it. Even if every person on both sides got equally angry at perceived attacks on or defenses of AI, and had the same sensitivity as to what they perceived as an attack or defense, the larger side is the one who will have a stronger reaction, and will be more likely to warrant a disclaimer
Antis don't care about the truth, they only care that AI goes away (as if that will happen). Misinformation is the language they speak to bring people to their side. Tell a lie or misconception about water usage, more people get outraged, more people spread the lies and misconceptions, etc
Does he scream a lot in this video, like in the other ones?
Hank Green? I haven't seen him do anything like that.
In his recent videos on AI and environmentalism he raises his voice a lot, it's difficult to listen to.
I don't watch every video he releases, so I can't speak to that except to say he didn't do it in this one.
Thanks, I'll watch it then.
Interesting, I’ve kinda avoided his content because I got a weird vibe from him, but that’s cool to hear