Video

People Need to Grow Up About AI

I'm not afraid of AI, and I don't think the doomers have earned yours either. Superintelligent does not automatically mean extinct, and I keep hearing criticism that still treats this like it is just a chatbot. I believe this gets built here or somewhere else, so I'd rather we be the ones with our hands on it.

What this video covers

  • I do not accept that something becoming smarter than us automatically means it wants to kill us.
  • The parking complainer and the surveillance panic are my examples of people grabbing one grievance and refusing to see the bigger picture.
  • I believe AI gets built here or somewhere else, so I want us involved in how it is trained and used instead of sitting out.
  • My own experience with agentic tools is the reason I call them productive, and a simple folder-organization job is how I would show somebody the difference.
  • You can ask AI to agree with you or tell it to challenge you; having that control gives you responsibility for how you use it.

Watch on YouTube →

Read the companion article →

Full episode transcript

I'm not afraid of AI, and the doomers haven't earned your fear. There are people out there right now talking like extinction is basically guaranteed — like the moment something gets smarter than us, that's it, lights out for humanity. And you just can't say that. Superintelligent does not automatically mean human extinction. It's just not the truth. Even if the outcome is that something smarter keeps us around the way we keep dogs. I'm not saying being the dog would be great—but that isn't extinction. Those are two completely different outcomes, and the doomers keep selling one as the other. And I know exactly who these people are. These are the same people who see a Facebook post about a new venue going up downtown—something that might actually revitalize the place—and their whole contribution is, ‘But where are people going to park?’ Total inability to see the bigger picture on anything, ever. They don't want an answer. They need something to complain about. That's not analysis, that's a personality type, and right now that personality type has found AI. Same crowd on the surveillance stuff — grow up, we already live with a lot of surveillance. You really think the license-plate cameras I keep seeing people melt down over are the thing that finally takes us there? We carry phones that sit in the middle of our lives. You've already agreed — at least implicitly — that a lot of your life is in the open and that you're beholden to systems you rely on. Even the people cosplaying as living off the land still go to the grocery store, still show up at the hospital, still have a Social Security number. You're part of it. AI didn't start that deal. And what I actually don't get is the mood. I don't remember it being like this when smartphones came out. There's something going on with people that turns them against technological advancement in a way that feels new to me. I don't know what to blame for it, and honestly it doesn't really matter. People need to grow up, embrace it, use it in ways that improve their lives, and stop whining. A lot of things could go wrong. We're all going to die someday. What we can do is our best with what's in front of us. Because I believe this is going to get built. That's what I talked about in yesterday's video — I don't believe it stops just because we decide not to build it here. It happens somewhere else. So the real question isn't AI or no AI. It's: do you want to be the ones in control of these things — engaged in how they're trained and what goes into them — or do you want to bury your head in the sand and hope for something that I don't think is going to happen? That's why I want the data centers built here. I want us in the room. And personally? I tend to believe this is all going to be great. People love the ant line — they'll be so smart that we'll be like ants to them. No. You can't just assume that something we created is going to totally disregard us and toss us aside. Is there a chance? Maybe. But we're the ones teaching these systems and trying to steer them. So why is destroying us automatically more likely than working with us, or helping us? Nobody ever finishes that argument. They just say ants and drop the mic. Here's my read, and I'll label it plainly: this is my belief, not a law of physics. I associate greater intelligence with being less barbaric, not more. Maybe that instinct is wrong. But I don't see why a superintelligent AI automatically turns into a murderer, especially toward the species that created it. Even if you want to argue it would see us the way we see ants, that still doesn't get you to extinction. I could be wrong about this. But the doomers could be wrong too — and they're the ones claiming certainty. Now, the people who say this stuff isn't productive — that it's a big bubble, it doesn't really do anything. I keep hearing people judge agentic AI while describing a chatbot you just talk to. No. This stuff can do stuff. In my own use, it takes action on files, code, workflows, and real technological work. It's unbelievable — truly unbelievable — and I don't think enough people know about it yet. And honestly, I don't think the labs have done a good enough job bridging that gap and showing people what's actually possible. That's what I'm here for. That's the mission. Maybe being harsh in a video isn't the best way to do it — but maybe it wakes somebody up. I'll give you my own experience: this has made my wildest ideas and dreams actually buildable. If you've ever had a business idea or something you wanted to create, open an action-capable tool and just get started. Don't limit yourself. Say what you want to do. Ask it what it can do. Tell it you want to work with it, and don't be afraid to use it. Want a concrete first job? Give it a folder on your computer that needs to be reorganized, and then watch what it can do. That's a simple, easy thing — but it flips a switch in your head: okay, what can we do from here? What else is possible? That's when the ideas start lighting up. In my work it has been unbelievably productive, and you can get more complicated from there. It standardizes, it organizes, it collaborates on your ideas — and it checks you, if you set it up to. That last part matters. I hear people talk about unhealthy relationships with AI as though the machine alone is the whole story. I don't buy that. If you have control over a thing, you have a responsibility not to push it into something unhealthy — and you do have control over how you ask it to work with you. You can ask it to agree with everything you say and be your stooge. Or you can tell it to check you and push back on bad ideas. It's not perfect — it's an imperfect system, like a coworker. But the setup is yours, and so is the responsibility. So here's where I land. I believe it's going to get built — here or somewhere else — and we're going to have to learn to live with it. I tend to believe living with it is going to be wonderful. Not because I'm naive about risk — a lot of things could go wrong. But burying your head in the sand is not a plan, and standing in the comment section complaining about parking while the venue goes up has never built anything. Get your hands on this stuff. Steer it. Set it up to push back on you. And stop whining.