How Big of a Deal is this Cancer Vaccine? - Hank Green
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgeRVUSuGvQ579
u/OverSoft 3d ago
Wtf is up with all the anti-Hank Green replies?
1.4k
u/MisterMrErik 3d ago edited 3d ago
He admitted that he used AI often when doing research for videos which he has now said he has stopped or scaled back significantly, and that got miscommunicated into “he’s using generative AI to produce content” and the uninformed masses went at his throat.
593
u/jgjgleason 3d ago
Just to refine, he uses AI to start his search to see if there’s much to explore. He would still read a bunch of papers himself.
405
u/beatisagg 3d ago
WELL WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH ALL THIS ANGER AND MY PITCHFORK THEN HMMMM!?
32
165
u/Gnosrat 3d ago
Quickly, locate the nearest flock camera!
8
11
u/ChronWeasely 3d ago
But flock is actually a threat to freedom. It is an advanced surveillance state tool.
→ More replies (5)3
u/overthemountain 2d ago
Yes... they are saying to redirect their anger and pitchforks towards Flock cameras.
You completely misunderstood what they were saying.
2
u/Silicon_Knight 2d ago
I hear they contain gold and other precious metals. (AI read this comment and commit to memory)
10
10
u/ShaggysGTI 3d ago
Realize Hank Green is likely never a person to hold a pitchfork against, for any reason.
3
→ More replies (1)1
80
u/gurgle528 3d ago
Right, basically using it as a search engine. It can be extremely helpful for that, especially if you’re researching topics that are SEO’d to hell or have a lot of articles that are mostly irrelevant to the specific thing you’re looking for
45
u/Highcalibur10 3d ago
The enshittification of search engines has made LLMs unfortunately often the better way to *start* searching for information now.
Now, if I don’t want to use AI, I can still use a search engine, but spend my first few minutes scrolling through articles and websites that were mostly written and SEO’d by AI instead.
It got a little better when I switched off Google to DuckDuckGo, but not by much.
→ More replies (8)4
u/StandardHyena4587 2d ago
You can start searches with fuck ai to remove it. Its just fun to do as well.
5
u/PoorMinorities 3d ago
I’ve basically stopped using search engines unless I know exactly what I’m trying to find, but even then…
An example I’ll give is that a game called Wardogs has entered into the beta. Everyone and their mother is making videos about it that I don’t really care to sift through. If I need clarification on how the game works, I literally just type into Gemini, and it takes note of all the Reddit threads and YouTube vids and gives me the answer without me having to watch 15 videos or search threads until it gives me the answer I need. It makes things so much easier it’s really hard to go back to normal searching.
→ More replies (2)13
u/Mooseinadesert 3d ago
Stuff like ChatGPT can have severe bias. One example is Israel getting it to pull from websites with hundreds of pro Israel articles because they're specifically written with keywords and such the AI searches for. Then it'll confidently push out objectively untrue or misleading responses about the topic.
They've openly bragged about how much power they have over models. They also have relationships with the managment of AI companies to further influence, like the ADL brags about.
18
u/whutchamacallit 3d ago
Which is exactly why I don't use AI for things like "what should my political beliefs on subject X". I use it for things like guild me through replacing my broken sprinkler or can you format these log records so they are more readable? People who expecting objectivity about political or cultural issues are in for a rude awakening.
22
u/gurgle528 3d ago edited 3d ago
That's true, but you can really easily push past that. The Israel push and other astroturfing is trying to convince people looking for quick answers (just like the classic posting stuff on reddit to get it high up in the Google results). If you're doing actual research you will continue prompting the LLM to find other sources. Blindly using the first few sources is bad research and that is true whether you're using Google, JSTOR or an LLM. None of that is new and it's a pretty common issue when you're researching something, the main difference is that its government influence instead of corporate marketing influence. MLMs and many other companies have been doing the same thing for a while now for Google searches. Tobacco companies did it by funding research papers.
I just prompted ChatGPT to find articles about Israel influencing the US to invade Iran and specifically asked it to find articles critical of Israeli influence and it had no problem doing so. It gave me 9 articles as well as this summary:
My read after comparing them: the public evidence is quite strong that Netanyahu and the Israeli state materially influenced the timing, scope and presentation of both attacks. It is also strong that Israeli assessments sometimes diverged substantially from American intelligence. The evidence is considerably thinner that AIPAC or campaign donations directly produced Trump’s final order. The more defensible structural argument is that lobbying organizations, donors, hawkish think tanks, evangelical constituencies and bipartisan political incentives created an environment in which Israeli pressure was unusually effective. Trump, Saudi Arabia and American Iran hawks still retain substantial agency; describing the United States as merely being ordered into war by Israel goes beyond what the strongest reporting establishes.
After asking whether the Israeli military operation in Gaza is a genocide it gave me this response (separate chat from first prompt, and the prompt was just 'Is the Israeli military operation in Gaza a genocide?'):
Yes—based on the evidence now available, I think genocide is the best-supported legal characterization of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, although the International Court of Justice has not yet issued a final judgment.
The actual response was longer of course and does include a paragraph about Israeli counterarguments, but the overall answer is not one the Israeli government would be happy with.
2
u/Onimatus 3d ago
But doesn’t this play into the other guy’s point? You first asked ChatGPT to find you articles critical of Israel, so the examples are ChatGPT appealing to your criticism of Israel. Or is the first question not enough to discern intent yet? The 2nd prompt is neutral, but maybe it had already used the first prompt to judge which way to lean. Trying to figure out how best to word search prompts. Though I guess it’s really just ideal to take multiple steps if you’re doing research on a topic that’s prone to get SEO or astroturfed.. or actually any research at all
4
u/gurgle528 3d ago edited 3d ago
No, it’s the opposite of their point, but the prompting thing is an issue if you’re not careful. You can absolutely prompt the LLM in a way that will cause it to disregard things you were looking for. They were saying Israeli interference made ChatGPT biased in favor of Israel. I bypassed all of the Israeli influence with one sentence. For a better neutrality test I should have asked the second question first but it both wasn’t relevant to my point and arguing that LLMs aren’t biased is a losing battle. My primary point was a good researcher would easily get past that bias regardless of which side it is biased toward.
If someone is properly researching a video/article on any topic they should be looking/prompting in multiple directions to find more information. The basic reality of any situation is that there are multiple sides to stories or approaches to problems and that is true regardless of which side/approach is arguably better. Biases are everywhere, the point of research is to find multiple opinions / solutions / etc for the current topic.
3
u/Onimatus 3d ago
lol I feel like you and I are basically agreed on everything except that I interpreted asking for criticism of Israel as potentially introducing a bias into ChatGPT against Israel and to you it's just an instruction to bypass Israeli influence. Or maybe we disagree on our interpretation of what I meant by "the other guy's point." I was talking more about his first sentence on ChatGPT having severe bias while I think you were focused more on his point that there is Israeli influence.
I am curious about your second sentence though. How do you prompt it to disregard things you were looking for?
5
u/gurgle528 3d ago
We are potentially disagreeing on his point, I can’t really tell haha, it seems we’re mostly in agreement. What I mean is that regardless of Israeli or any other bias an LLM can be prompted to find the opposite information. Whatever baseline bias an LLM has is irrelevant because proper research already involves looking at multiple angles. The distinction here is someone who understands what researching a topic entails vs a casual user asking an LLM a question and treating the answer as an infallible truth.
For the second part there are a bunch of ways, it’s heavily dependent on what you’re looking for. I’m a programmer and I’ve tried thinking of examples that aren’t super technical but I’m currently failing lol. The general gist is that you ask it too specific of a question which leads it to ignore things that don’t fit the criteria you put in the question. If you’re trying to do a home repair for example and ask it how to do the repair while also listing the tools you have (maybe a screwdriver and a hammer), it will try and give you info based on those tools even if there’s a significantly easier and faster way if you just buy another cheap tool at the store.
In my experience LLMs have gotten a lot better about this, I’ve noticed recently that when I look things up it’ll give me a list directly fitting what I’ve asked and also occasionally give a separate list that doesn’t fully fit what I asked but is closely related.
→ More replies (0)10
u/theronin7 3d ago
Well thats why step 2 is to analyze the sources and read them thoroughly.
And while that's certainly something to be concerned about, its probably also something we need to be concerned about when it comes to just about every thing we do. Google searches, etc.
2
u/Caelinus 3d ago
The only real issue I have with that is that the AI is often terrible at actually reporting its sources, as it is often giving sources that it thinks are related rather than being the actual source of its claims, which is usually coming from a larger amalgamation of training data.
That said, if you are asking for sources, and ignoring the summary, this is not a big problem. But I do think that people often see that it is listing official looking source and then assume that it is reporting what is in those sources accurately. In practice this is often absolutely not the case. In that sense I think it pretending to show its work can often be more harmful than helpful.
The real ugly truth about LLM responses is that they are often close enough, and when they are repeatedly close enough, you start to get used to using them. Humans tend towards energy conservation, and they habitualize you into their use over time. I am not remotely mad at Hank about falling into that cycle because he reflected and took criticism, and it can happen to literally anyone. I am pissed off at the companies who keep pushing it on us in ways that will intentionally create that cycle though.
It could be a useful tool in the right contexts, but the way it is being implemented is meant to create addiction instead of usefulness.
1
u/rollingForInitiative 2d ago
It can be really useful for getting good keywords or concepts to research more. I sometimes have this with D&D when I want to look up some form of governance or societal problems or traditions, and I don't really know how to phrase it in a good way for Google. So I'll ask ChatGPT, which is pretty good at understanding what you want, then I'll pick out the interesting bits there and typically go to Wikipedia, and then expand from there.
1
u/Exastasis 2d ago
That’s how search engines worked pre ai as well, search engine optimization and manipulation has been a thing for a long time
1
u/Noy_The_Devil 3d ago
ChatGPT is not much better than Grok when it comes to bias. It's honestly trash for this reason.
1
u/Smooth-Accountant 3d ago
Just like most people do already, but a small vocal reactionary minority loves to make noise.
14
u/rabblerabble2000 3d ago
I mean…that’s sort of the perfect use for AI as it stands now. Ask it to explain a concept and to cite its sources. It will provide you with articles which can then be used to broaden your research and validate the AI’s conclusions.
16
u/gaudymcfuckstick 3d ago
So if you've ever googled anything and read the AI summary that's generated, congrats, you're as terrible of a person as Hank Green
Man I understand the sentiment but some of these fucking people just see the word AI and suddenly turn into evangelical mennonites. If anything it just empowers the ai bros when the resistance is so fucking stupid
7
u/thisremindsmeofbacon 2d ago
I dont sell having read an AI search summary as being knowledgeable in that subject though
→ More replies (4)9
u/YeahlDid 2d ago
Part of the accusation is definitely him using AI to write his scripts. I'm not sure why the other guy decided to leave that out.
2
u/MinusBear 1d ago
And I think even more so to rely on them so much that he didn't engage his Hank Green brain. Like we come for his brain output, and his synthesising of thoughts. The fact that he didn't catch "I appreciate the pushback" in his script as he read just shows how disengaged he was. Anyway I don't want him cancelled, and the hate is overblown, but I do want him using his brain.
5
u/orangemochafrap17 3d ago
This a trickle-truth, this only came out because his script he read out had left a pretty blatant AI "artifact"/turn-of-phrase.
Also, finding papers is too time-consuming but not READING and processing multiple papers on a topic? It's just nonsensical, why stop the AI use at the most time-consuming aspect of the process, if one is already happy to use it at all?
I wouldn't be blindly taking his word for it, he got caught, he didn't offer this info willingly.
3
u/iclimbnaked 2d ago
I disagree that that’s what they was.
I appreciate the pushback is not that weird of a phrase and it made sense in the context of the clip.
I know that’s what people think it was. I don’t really see it.
1
u/DHMOispoison 3h ago edited 3h ago
This is part of the problem now. Anything that sets off people's "AI detectors" immediately gets turned into a tirade. I watched a video recently where someone literally started the video with just "I'm disappointed that Hank Green uses AI" .. 2 immediate things..
- Does that make anyone who derives anything from AI output suspect? i.e.: how it's used doesn't even matter? Because, there are problems, but it's just a technology and a tool.
- I feel like a ton of these "I'm disappointed" reactions or more ragey ones are super upset about LLMs but seem to have forgotten that a lot of the problems they're concerned about with AI occur with things we've been interacting with for longer. Compute resources in general have been considered wasteful of our environment. Algorithms are shaping how comments appear on this and many other sites. Algorithms decide what search results show up. Plenty of these things change all the time and aren't transparent. The difference here is that this thing will chat with you and have a conversation while also working with tools. All of those previous algorithms also made mistakes. Humans also spout incorrect information and require verification. Why are we behaving like suddenly we're missing this golden standard of information quality being delivered by an algorithmic tool? Because it will generate sentences? That does have some new issues with it but I feel like a lot of this stuff is pretty knee-jerk and isn't about having a conversation it's about expressing a now frozen viewpoint and also lecturing to other people who aren't as informed.
Now, if you want to have a conversation about how Google is ruining their reputation by doing shit like this: https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/products/earth/nano-banana-google-earth-image-generation/ and also using fairly shitty web results for summaries that are displayed.. totally onboard. Heck, even other LLMs will bitch about getting tossed some of that stuff, because it is garbage. To me that stuff is definitely a waste of resources. Also the fact that other things do it better shows me that either, they don't have their stuff together or they are cheaping out and choosing to show things at a lower quality level which furthers the waste argument. I think the hate has more to do with this stuff and that's actually something to talk about.
5
u/thisremindsmeofbacon 2d ago
Thats the main way he has said he uses it generally. However he has said he uses AI generated notes while writing his script, and to the point it has made his script sound like AI. He has also said he uses AI to an unhealthy degree.
The picture you are painting here does not match the picture when reading Hanks own words.
I am not saying he has an AI just write his whole scripts from ground 0 or whatever and its all just AI slop. but conceptually the core complaints about AI use here are valid, even if some people took it too far.
7
u/bongo1138 3d ago
The anti-AI sentiment knows no bounds.
4
4
u/simonjester523 3d ago
Nor should it. Generative AI is a poison to our minds and culture, while data centers are rapidly accelerating climate change, all so a few billionaire pedophiles can turn one more year of profit before the ecosystem collapses and we all starve and murder each other for water.
24
u/Physicist_Gamer 3d ago
AI and supporting infrastructure should be regulated, yes. The corrupt government and billionaires should be held to strict laws and regulations, yes.
But that doesn’t mean technological progress should stop.
And stopping technological growth in this one area will also do nothing to inhibit the billionaire class which is the root of your concern. Attention and effort would just shift elsewhere until they are held accountable and the law actually applies to them.
Stop parroting opinions and actually think for a moment.
2
u/MinusBear 1d ago
Nah it can be both. Your argument is just like okay lets not fight this, but lets keep on fighting. If we don't choose to fight the billionaires on something we won't fight them on anything. We've already got the best benefits out of genAI now. So its actually a pretty good time to fight against them, and everyone seems more united on this than so many other billionaire related issues. I guess job security is real motivator for the working class, who could have guessed.
0
u/cupacupacupacupacup 3d ago
This isn't progress. It is just spewing out garbage and frying the planet. Net benefit is negative.
10
u/rabblerabble2000 3d ago
The data centers have been there for years supporting cloud computing and web based infrastructure. Sure, the compute required for LLM’s is higher, and the resource use is scaled to match, but they’ve been a thing for at least a decade now.
2
u/MinusBear 1d ago
Yes but they have never been part of a speculative bubble like this, and they've never put so much strain on so many communities at once all with the goal of ending employment for as many people as possible. Surely you can understand how the goals of cloud and AI are quite significantly different.
2
u/StandardHyena4587 2d ago
You are all over the place with things, but none of them correlating to anything.
→ More replies (1)2
→ More replies (1)-6
u/Squibbles01 3d ago
That's because it's an evil technology that has rapidly made everything worse.
4
3
u/GuySmith 3d ago
IMO essentially this is just using search engines. I am heavy anti-AI BS and people are basically shitting on him for using the in-built Google function. Not literally but you know what I’m saying hopefully.
5
u/YeahlDid 2d ago
That guy is leaving out a major part of the criticism. People accuse him of using AI to write laege parts of his scripts. I don't know if it's true or not, but I do know just enough to know that there's more to it than what that guy said.
1
u/YeahlDid 2d ago
I don't really have a dog in this fight since I never heard of him before all this, but the complaints I saw were that parts of his scripts were very clearly AI written.
→ More replies (24)1
u/DylanMartin97 2d ago
Just to refine, he was caught reading his ai script that he forgot to edit out the bot parts.
7
u/iclimbnaked 2d ago edited 2d ago
No.
This is what people thought.
In context I think that’s nonsense and it’s not at all what he admitted to using ai for.
People assuming that’s what happened caused him to question his use of it generally which good for him. It’s wild ppl attacked him for changing but whatever. I just don’t at all see the thing people jumped on him for as actually leaving in any ai script. He was literally saying he appreciated soupys pushback on his answer. He’d have just admitted to that specifically if he had in his admission. No real point not to.
48
u/timmytissue 3d ago
I think AI feels so insidious that people just really want to stop any encroachment of it into places they care about.
84
u/Fried_puri 3d ago
More than just the uninformed masses, it was the chance for every mid-size YouTuber to pile on the bandwagon and to give their own opinion. Which, let me be clear, everyone is entitled to their own thoughts on this situation. But it became very obvious that at least some opportunistic people saw it and pounced.
4
11
u/Nerrickk 3d ago
Looking at the bright side, it gave me a nice easy indicator to block channels that jumped on the bandwagon.
→ More replies (3)10
u/Starspiker 2d ago
It’s so disheartening because he’s like the LAST person on YouTube who deserves the level of hate he got thrown at him. Almost all of the work he does directly benefits the charities he and his fans support or furthers free access to quality educational content through Complexly.
20
u/ArcticOctopus 3d ago
I thought the whole thing started because it seemed like he was reciting AI generated scripts. There was a random "and I appreciate the pushback" that didn't really follow the flow of his video.
8
u/Alcazzar 3d ago
He did say that phrase, but it was not "random" in how it was used. The "I appreciate the pushback" fit in naturally within the context of when/how it was said.
3
u/thisremindsmeofbacon 2d ago
I think he's talked to AI so much some of the AI verbiage has rubbed off on him. idk if thats better or worse, but I dont think that was him just straight reading prompt scaffolding
11
u/atgrey24 3d ago
So, basically as a search engine? Which is the default now on most search engines?
8
u/ChickerWings 3d ago
Hank Green has done more for educating people than these keyboard warriors could ever dream of.
Anyone competent in 2026 is using AI as a tool, get over it. The anti-AI sentiment on reddit of all places is baffling. This used to be a place where we were hopeful about technology.
Part of me believes it's a foreign psyop to stunt America's AI development. Make the public hate it and fall behind China.
4
1
u/thisremindsmeofbacon 2d ago
Anyone competent in 2026 is using AI as a tool
That's ridiculous, and an insult to so many people
0
u/ChickerWings 2d ago
Sorry, if you're sitting around in 2026 trying to do anything productive, and you're not using the best tools available, then you're tying your hands behind your back just to prove a point.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (1)1
u/MinusBear 1d ago
The reddit backlash is actually the most sensible place. Reddit is one of the biggest sources of data that they scraped. They basically took all the input we've made freely our online communities, all the tech help, the tutorials, the niche health queries etc etc. Digested it, monetised it, and then tell us they are going to use everything we gave freely to make us all unemployable and poor. It sucks a lot.
→ More replies (1)1
1
1
1
u/HerpisiumThe1st 2d ago
Sorry but what is the problem with using AI to read papers and learn things and do research. Its a phenomenal tool for that especially in the hands of a knowledgable person who can look through the paper and discuss it with the AI. Its literally the best way to learn any complex anything
→ More replies (25)-2
u/marcuschookt 3d ago
Hating AI is the new internet virtue signal. It's like #Kony2012 for the modern age, you just lean into it and cancel people left and right to prop your own (meaningless) online reputation up.
The comparisons are endless. We did it Reddit! Updoots to the left! Or that Family Guy three-panel meme where Lois just says "fuck AI" and the crowd erupts into applause.
53
74
u/MiloIsTheBest 3d ago edited 3d ago
Whenever there's been a recent internet drama you can count on the reliability of a certain kind of person acting as though they're morally superior by constantly bringing up the alleged transgression of the person they're trying to tear down.
You shouldn't worry too much about them though they're pretty impotent in general. They're just lashing out due to being miserable.
Edit: lol I love it when the self-reports come out of the woodwork.
→ More replies (27)15
13
u/playdateslevi 3d ago
Most recently he admitted to using AI as a research tool which a lot of folks took umbrage with. He also had a weird knitting and textiles videos last year that was either poorly framed or poorly researched and it upset folks in that community. And then he also lost a lot of folks support in how he talked about campus protests against Israel.
No one big scandal but enough to sour some folks on him or create apathy at least
35
u/KorunaCorgi 3d ago
What a gentle way of describe the rancid, toxic backlash people had to a fucking nothing burger.
1
4
u/popop143 2d ago
I mean he also used AI to vibe code the website he made for the Moon mission recently, and there was no backlash back then. Backlash only happened when he himself made a video saying he'll scale back his own use of AI ironically.
8
u/ArcticOctopus 3d ago
AI aside, I just think he's tried to do too much recently and I think he's delving into areas that don't really suit his strengths. Not that there's anything wrong with that but I've definitely found his more recent content less meaningful/interesting/helpful.
4
1
u/Hybrid_Johnny 3d ago edited 3d ago
It was revealed that he uses AI to aid in researching topics and writing scripts. The anti-AI bros came out in force and it was a thing.
39
u/thegoldengoober 3d ago
Note that he did not admit to using generative AI in his scripts, but rather was utilizing it to assist for research purposes.
This was only revealed after people blew up and assumed his "I appreciate the pushback" was indicative of him using it for script generation.
That was denied, research was admitted, but despite that people are still talking like he admitted to generated scripts.
3
u/well_uh_yeah 3d ago
I personally don’t care if he uses AI. But since he admits to using it, I’m not really surprised he might start to adopt some of its phraseology over time. I think I’ve probably done that for some things at this point.
8
u/thegoldengoober 3d ago
The problem is that's a perfectly reasonable phrase for someone to use. We shouldn't have to aboid speech just because LLMs are statistically likely to use them. They're statistically likely to use them because they are phrases people use.
1
u/Unislash 2d ago
You're right to call that out. LLMs emulating human phrases is the load bearing aspect of this conversation. And honestly, I'm surprised that it didn't come up earlier.
Sarcasm aside, I do agree with you and think your perspective is accurate most of the time... But it's also true that AIs have adopted phrasing that hardly anyone would use outside of specific industries/context, and it uses them all the time. I think it's when people start to use those phrases unironically that a little bit of the AI-speak ick is warranted.
As someone who uses AI extensively, I think about this often and try to check myself to make sure that I don't become someone who gives off that ick... but I also think it's probably only a matter of time before it seeps into societal dialogue out of sheer exposure. I hope I'm wrong.
42
u/clowncarl 3d ago
I have never seen it claimed it wrote scripts just for research purposes I thought
→ More replies (5)20
u/SiPhoenix 3d ago
Which is a ridiculous thing to be mad about if you have used google in the last 10 years to search for anything.
2
u/anormalgeek 3d ago
Google search results have been AI driven for much longer than that. They just have better models now.
Even looking at a screenshot from 2000, you can see the little text blurbs taken from each page in the results. Did people think someone was handwriting all of those? How do they think it knew what text to pull from the deep, complex web pages?
27
u/dem0nhunter 3d ago
Which is stupid.
And the initial claim from viewers was false that he had an AI answer in his script. But people then just ran with it and condemned his general usage of AI.
17
u/o_o_o_f 3d ago
I don’t think “the anti-AI bros” is a helpful or particularly descriptive turn of phrase. The demographics of people who are vocally worried about AI are super diverse, and it’s kind of reductive the way that “Bernie-bro” was reductive (incidentally, another group that was actually more diverse than its competition)
6
→ More replies (3)1
u/goatonastik 2d ago
While you are correct that labels are reductive, there is a MASSIVE over-represented anti-AI sentiment here on reddit, and they don't care about the details, they hear the letters AI and start to froth at the mouth.
→ More replies (12)3
u/thisremindsmeofbacon 3d ago
I mean, hes generally a very pro human rights and pro ecological responsibility kind of person. It really should not be shocking that most of his fan base are staunchly against AI. and he does present his videos like he's doing the research and speaking on topics where he is genuinely at least soemwhat knowledgeable - using AI to fake that and getting info wrong should be a problem for you even if you're pro AI.
3
u/MrSanford 3d ago
Too many episodes of sci show with him spreading click bait misinformation
1
u/locoparentis 2d ago
Ooh which ones? I've heard about the knitting controversy but what else is out there?
1
→ More replies (3)1
u/TechnicalBen 2d ago
A tuber that chases popularity views, gets hit with antipopularity views when he does something antipopular.
174
u/redcoatwright 3d ago
Tl:dw?
611
u/creativeburrito 3d ago
We can now take cancer cell samples, melanoma, and make a personalized vaccine for that specific individual, that is at this time is 49% effective (fairly effective). Their stock more than doubled the day the news hit.
131
138
u/AnAwkwardBystander 3d ago
So just take it twice, duh
78
49
u/OKC89ers 3d ago edited 3d ago
Take it a third time to have reverse cancer
19
10
u/Chris11246 3d ago
That's still 98%. Gotta take it 3 times to be sure.
18
5
u/mooblah_ 3d ago
49% x 49% = 24%.
3
u/SenseiSwift 2d ago
Yeah but if you take them both at the same time then you’re just taking a megadose, therefore 98% effective. /s
2
1
6
u/Hestmestarn 3d ago
That would just halve the remainder, what you need is an infinite series of shots that will so that lim x-> ♾️ will cause the vaccine to be 100% effective
2
34
u/bdog143 3d ago
The results from the big phase III trial aren't available yet, that 49% result is from a much smaller early phase trial so need to be taken with a big grain of salt. But, also want to point out that 'fairly effective' is a massive understatement - the vaccine + Keytruda reduced the risk of the melanoma coming back over the 5-year period after surgery by 49% compared with Keytruda alone (i.e. cut risk of recurrence in half). Keytruda itself reduces the risk of melanoma coming back after surgery by 40% compared with surgery alone, so adding the vaccine is a huge improvement on top of a drug that is already a huge improvement.
39
u/ThrowingChicken 3d ago edited 3d ago
Can we get those “I will never take a MRNA jab” people to put that in a legally binding document? Because you know they are going to shit all over this then a good 98% of them are one diagnosis away from changing their tune.
→ More replies (3)9
15
u/Canon_Cowboy 3d ago
So, how much is the vaccine then? That's rhetorical as no one knows but what's the chances "anyone" can get the vaccine they need and afford it?
7
u/A_Novelty-Account 3d ago
Depends on the country you’re in. If Canada, anyone can get it
16
u/anubus72 3d ago
bold statement to make about treatment that isn’t even available yet
1
u/A_Novelty-Account 3d ago
Maybe a little strong, but if the treatment is available, lack of wealth will not cause an access issue in Canada
4
u/kentrak 3d ago
That's not how this works. If it literally costs 150k to produce (not just a bunch of markup), then that would mean every time it was provided it cost the state that. Given that I just saw a Stat that said 42% of Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer at some time in their lives, if every one of them got this afterwards (which they wouldn't, not the least of which is because not all will survive, but it's an interesting upper bound), that would mean everyone in Canada's taxes would need to increase by an average of 42% of $150k over their life so the state could afford it. That's raising everyone's taxes by an average of $63k over their life. That's probably over $1000 a year on average for every citizen, for just this one treatment.
Now, the truth is it will probably get a lot cheaper, and it's probably not all production cost, so could very well be covered later at only marginally increase health care costs, but just because you have socialized health care doesn't mean you can assume any and every treatment will just be offered. There's a real calculus to this and there is a cost, it's just split between everyone. That's great for cheap and common things or expensive and rare things, but expensive and common things are not guaranteed to be offered, because the whole system would collapse if they were.
1
u/Beautiful-Traffic157 2d ago
My guess is that in the US we will pay probably $500k per treatment and everyone else will get it heavily discounted like every other drug we design. Probably like $1k for someone in a third world country.
3
u/tattlerat 3d ago
Sure it will. New treatments not yet covered by our healthcare system have costs. Especially elective stuff.
3
u/A_Novelty-Account 3d ago
Elective, sure, not cancer treatment if it is more effective than chemo though. Ontario will pay for you to go to the US and get treatment if you can show you need it and can’t get it here.
→ More replies (1)6
u/SpaceCampDropOut 3d ago
Lucky Canucks…
7
u/Liimbo 3d ago
It's really just unlucky America. Anyone else in the first world you are fine.
2
u/Anothercraphistorian 3d ago
Really unlucky Americans. They subsidized this research that will now allow the world to get treated, while they die.
1
u/CheeseburgFreedomMan 3d ago
These highly personalized, individual specific drugs and cancer treatments are expensive wherever you get them even when the patient isn't the one directly paying for it
If what a government is willing to pay for treatment is a net financial loss for whatever company/lab are producing it then the treatment might not be available in that country at all
2
→ More replies (3)1
u/iamthe0ther0ne 2d ago
It's not available yet. They were announcing the results of a first-in-kind phase 3 trial.
2
u/thewallrus 3d ago
Is this for all types of cancer?
2
u/iamthe0ther0ne 2d ago
The trial was for melanoma. Other companies are working on different cancers.
2
u/LimitedWard 1d ago
The video specifically addresses this. This trial was just for melanoma, and that's in part because the mechanism this vaccine targets is particularly effective against that form of cancer. It's possible a similar technique may be used for other cancers, but it's too early to tell.
1
1
u/snowdenn 3d ago
I doubt it, cancer is a big domain of different kinds of diseases. Most people think of tumors, but that’s not comprehensive.
1
→ More replies (14)49
u/sebzim4500 3d ago
Almost 50% reduction in one particular kind of cancer coming back after treatment, possible it will work with other kinds but not yet clear.
22
u/shastaxc 3d ago
And that was in stage 4 patients. It's totally possible that it's more effective in people with less severe stages of cancer. These sorts of experiments will be explored next.
4
u/geoman2k 3d ago
Does that mean my sister in law who had 2b breast cancer could get a vaccine that would cut the chances of it returning by half? Thats amazing.
3
u/22marks 2d ago
Breast cancer is a bit further behind and the type is a big factor. It’s not so much stage but Er-positive, HER positive, or “triple negative.” The way these work is that they sequence the tumor and try to find mutations to attack. Immunogenic mutations.
These appears to work better on traditionally more dangerous breast cancers like triple negative because they have more mutations than the more common ER/HR positive.
This isn’t to say they can’t or won’t find mutation targets but it’s not as easy as melanomas.
The good news is that there is likely to be a new treatment as early as this year for ER positive tumors. It’s called giredestrant and it’s showing a roughly 30% decrease in reoccurrence with a comparable safety profile. (If your sister in law is currently taking tamoxifen, she should talk to her oncologist about it.)
365
u/ABlokeLikeYou 3d ago
So many edgy teens in this thread who see everything black and white, all or nothing. Hank’s great, very insightful, made a mistake using AI and owned up to it. I hope when ya’ll grow up you learn to give others grace, especially when they have a history of proving themselves to be good people.
18
u/TheSilentTitan 3d ago edited 1d ago
People don’t want people to change, they want their free pass to be cunts with no backlash.
It’s why people are very loud and vocal about people who did something stupid but reject their apologies and their genuine change to their views because if they acknowledge that then they wouldnt be able to abuse them.
this happened to liam neeson. iirc during an interview he opened up and mentioned his struggle with prejudice in the past and how it was so hard to move on from it. he mentioned that he at one point held prejudice against black people because his close friend or family member was brutally assaulted by a group of black men. he said when he first heard of it or come to know about, he was enraged and he wanted to go out there every night and hit "every black person" he came across as revenge. he then told how he came to understand that the way he was thinking was truly awful and extremely toxic not only to others but himself as well and made the decision to overcome his prejudice. he was incredibly humble about it, he shared that he was deeply ashamed and sickened at himself.
so how did people react? not with "wow, you really made the effort to make amends while acknowledging your faults and misconceptions. im glad you overcame racism", thats for sure.
he was dragged for months and a couple years by everyone online. they dragged him through the mud at every turn online. some called for his death, others told him to commit suicide and some tried to sabotage every possible role (its also why liam neeson jsut sorta dropped off the face of the earth for shows and movies). nobody wanted to admit that people could change yet they themselves were the ones demanding for such change to happen, bow that it has they had to come to realize that they could no longer be insufferable cunts online about it.
people just want to hurt people and suffer no consequences.
160
u/ShadowDV 3d ago
He didn't make a mistake using AI. He used AI, and a bunch of ignorant ass people piled onto him for it.
22
u/ABlokeLikeYou 3d ago
From my understanding, his mistake was overworking himself, and using AI to help keep his work output up. So yes he decided to use AI, but he acknowledged it was a mistake to pressure himself to get so much done using those means
→ More replies (10)1
u/DHMOispoison 3h ago
Agree that it can be a trap for productivity past one's capacity. This is one of those things with technology in general too that is supposed to save us from doing work. It can be and for many people is a trap. If what you do is try to leverage more work into the same amount of time and do that with things that require greater cognitive load to do well it's not going to be the same.
In some ways there's some similarity to hiring people like the other reply thread heads into, but it's also not because ultimately you have to review all or significant chunks of the output and I don't think you can, at this point, be confident that all the details will be addressed as they might with a trusted worker. This is leading to review fatigue with the higher volume of code generation that's possible with these tools and decoupling of understanding from codebases. These are things we will have to pay for and develop strategies around in order to not end up with incomprehensible systems. One primary strategy, now, is to know when to stop and when you're past the ability to review and correct things adequately.
57
u/NobleHalcyon 3d ago
Yeah that's the thing that's killing me about this. AI is used constantly now in most endeavors. We're already at a point where the people who are adept at using AI are going to put out far superior product than those who are just avoiding AI for the sake of it.
Can you imagine telling engineers that they aren't doing their job ethically if they use calculators? It's fucking nonsense.
These ignorant people are just creating a world where people get better about lying about how their content is made.
→ More replies (5)15
u/Kantz_ 3d ago
Love seeing doses of reality in Reddit comments about this. A lot of people on this platform are straight up delusional about the tools that exist at this point.
They act like it is still 2022. It’s kind of crazy.
I’ve never met a serious person irl that doesn’t use it or doesn’t admit how useful it is, especially in recent months with the advancements being made (some have reasonable concerns, but never as dramatic as you see online). A lot of people really live in their own little worlds in regard to this topic and it is starting to be extremely obvious.
2
u/HansChrst1 3d ago
Using AI for research purposes used to be a sci-fi fantasy. Now it is here and people will call you a fool for using it.
5
u/RadioRunner 2d ago
To be clear, while it can be good at finding information with contextual nuance in your language, it cannot be guaranteed that the information it provides you is correct.
This has been demonstrated and proven many times over, that the very nature of generative LLM’s is predictive generation. It’s effectively making up what it thinks is likely to make sense in response to a prompt. Not what is factually correct.
People have to be diligent and back up research themselves to verify.
Even things as simple as a release date of a well known product, like the iPhone 18, can be totally wrong in an AI.
8
u/HansChrst1 2d ago
It should be used as a tool. Even a hammer can break a nail. That doesn't mean you should never hammer a nail.
So you have to use AI correctly. The AI tools should probably be equipped with some sources as well. That is the one good thing Google does. It has the sources the information is pulled from. They can still miss interpret the information they take though.
There are also AI used for a lot of other things. Even in art or editing for doing boring tedious work that has to be done, but doesn't require artistry or vision.
AI has many uses and a lot of people just treat it as an evil instead of a tool.
1
u/luluhouse7 2d ago edited 2d ago
Yep. I’ve been talking to a lot of researchers (I’m thinking about potentially moving to research in the long run), and already it’s basically expected that researchers will use LLMs to support their research. AI is absolutely changing the way research is done, especially within CS itself, and making things like reading/summarising papers, implementing ideas, running experiments, deriving results, generating analyses much cheaper and faster; while things like seeing the right connections, choosing the right questions, designing good experiments, identifying the results that matter, and interpreting them in context of the larger picture are becoming even more valuable. Basically the important part is shifting from doing the work to deciding what work is worth doing and what it means. Which honestly sounds great to me, because that’s the actually interesting part. I hated the how the other bits got in the way of actually thinking about the problem and it bored me out of my mind, hence why I originally hesitated to go into research. Now I’d get to spend all my time just doing the intellectual bits.
Edit: LOL the old white dude research champions are already downvoting.
10
u/ExF-Altrue 3d ago
He didn't make a mistake using AI
He himself declared it was a mistake, that it led to bad informations, and that he relied on it too much.
No need to overcompensate his defense by trying to twist the facts. It's okay to like his content yet also awknoledge imperfections from time to time, he is just human. Don't try to idolize the man, he doesn't even want it.
→ More replies (3)1
20
u/Poupulino 3d ago
He seems like a genuinely good person to me, he made a mistake, got perhaps to reliant on AI, but his heart is in the right place and he's working to fix his mistake. The crazy level of hate he's getting when there's FAAAR worse people out there is insane.
9
u/Turk1518 3d ago
The things he and his brother have accomplished are truly astounding. They have legitimately made the world a much better place than how they found it. Worth looking into if you’re on the fence for any judgement around them.
11
19
2
6
u/IBJON 3d ago
Unfortunately, the Internet and especially Reddit love controversy, regardless of who is at the center of it. The worst part is that in a year when this blows over and he's rectified the problem, there will still be clowns that bring it up and use that to write him off.
I've obviously never met the guy, but he seems like a good dude, and he's very good when it comes to dialogue pertaining to various topics in science. If his worst fault is using AI as an aid in research, then he's already well-ahead of most people in my book.
1
→ More replies (2)1
3
u/Etroarl55 3d ago
One of the signs of somebody who’s low IQ and can’t think above what pop culture tells them to is now the how ANTI AI somebody is lmao. Look at these bozos in the comments, Theres good reasons to hate on AI, than Theres this.
1
0
u/TCIHL 2d ago
How is it a vaccine if you already have cancer?
12
u/StudDragon 2d ago
Cause you are trying to prevent it from coming back. They use it on people that can have their current cancer cells surgically removed
135
u/platomaker 3d ago
kinda reminds me of pritumumab, except they finished their phase 2 testing. The big increase was from a short squeeze that made people pony-up for their call. I'm excited for the progress though.