463
Anon is a nice guy
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
463 points (97.3% liked)
Greentext
7687 readers
1348 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Was quite a lot of controversy around this topic https://www.veritasium.com/videos/2021/7/23/why-you-should-want-driverless-cars-on-roads-now
Not well disclosed sponsoring among other things afaik. That video was why I unsubbed, no idea if there has been new stuff since
EDIT: Talking about people like tyler, you were just providing neutral commentary which I appreciate.
original comment: Jesus, people on the internet are like fucking elephants. One mistake, even if it's corrected and they change, and a creator gets branded for the rest of their career. What a joke, acting like people can't change from experience.
That was not the one I’m talking about. I’m talking about the literal faking of a science experiment he did when he did a sponsored segment for wet wipes.
I understand your justifiable concern, however I disagree with the blanket statement.
First off, if I remember the video correctly, it is not hidden that Waymo was the video sponser. It may not have been in the spotlight, but I don't think that's automatically a bad thing.
Secondly, it is very possible for some one to hold different opinions to yours, even with identical evidence. It was clear to me that he really did like the technology and made his best case for it. If new information has come to light, then that's worth re-examining the opinion. Personally, I have always been in fabour of replacing human drivers with AI, for a wide variety of reasons. I agree with his sentiment that the sooner we replace human drivers, the safer we'll all be. That being said, there is obviously a conflict of interest in the industry between making the technology safe, and profitable. And we all know what happens the larger an organization gets.
Third, the majority of the videos are not opinion pieces. They explain physics, chemistry, mechanics, etc. I'm not sure how some one can misrepresent physics, without being objectively wrong. And they seem to be pretty universally correct in their rigor. There has been more than one instance where the channel has come under scrutiny for being accused of manipulating experiments, and each time he comes back to re-explain the experiment and show that it had been misunderstood, not misrepresented.
https://www.iflscience.com/youtuber-derek-muller-won-a-10000-physics-bet-against-professor-60235
Hard to find a direct like but the "How electricity works" controversy also seems to fit this theme.
I am not saying the channel is above skepticism or is the poster child of perfection by any means. But I don't think it's fair to boycott on the grounds of a single opinion you happen to disagree with, especially when that opinion is genuinely based on available research and evidence. I think this is actually a disservice to progress as a whole. If you find an enemy in everyone that does share your exact values, it leaves progressives divided.
We need to get rid of cars, the sooner the better. Whether self-driving, electric, or a combination of those, they are the worst transportation method for most use-cases. Cars are only used as much as they currently are, because they are the most profitable for the capitalist and seem immediately convenient for the user, resulting in a double tragedy-of-commons situation.
Being paid by a car company, regurgitating their opinions, and not being clear enough about the whole situation, all while being a presumably trusted science presenter is unethical.
Absolutely wild fucking take.
Yes, that is automatically a bad thing.
AI is overkill for this, like the vast majority of its applications
I get the impression they meant AI as in general "Artificial Intelligence", rather than the buzzword AI used to describe LLMs.
There are types of AI that are very good at specific things and have been since before LLMs became accessible to use. We need to recognize that those are the types of AI which should be encouraged.
When the video was published it was not clear at all that it was sponsored content by waymo when you watched it via Youtube and that they only added clarification after a lot of reactions speaks as a plus, however I think you have a responsibility to expand on why you post glorification about a tech that was not then nor now ready for use. How many "self driving" accidents has happened due to the same population (ie humans) that increase risk of crash with ordinary Cruise Control?
I also choose to stop supporting people who blindly promote LLMs as panacea for everything. I fail to see how that interacts with my political beliefs. American progressives are way too right wing to ever seem like allies to my swedish leftist views and political works. I will always abhorr being painted as divider of progressive factions when choosing who Im subscribing to. I can hear prager u content without subscribing to them as well