this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2026
381 points (97.5% liked)
Greentext
7716 readers
765 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is the first I'm hearing of this, usually it's the opposite. Care to provide justification and evidence?
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
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, only used because they are the most profitable for the capitalist and seem immediately convenient for the user, resulting in a double tragedy-of-commons situation.