this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2026
1052 points (92.9% liked)

Comic Strips

24958 readers
3062 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

Rules
  1. 😇 Be Nice!

    • Treat others with respect and dignity. Friendly banter is okay, as long as it is mutual; keyword: friendly.
  2. 🏘️ Community Standards

    • Comics should be a full story, from start to finish, in one post.
    • Posts should be safe and enjoyable by the majority of community members, both here on lemmy.world and other instances.
    • Any comic that would qualify as raunchy, lewd, or otherwise draw unwanted attention by nosy coworkers, spouses, or family members should be tagged as NSFW.
    • Moderators have final say on what and what does not qualify as appropriate. Use common sense, and if need be, err on the side of caution.
  3. 🧬 Keep it Real

    • Comics should be made and posted by real human beans, not by automated means like bots or AI. This is not the community for that sort of thing.
  4. 📽️ Credit Where Credit is Due

    • Comics should include the original attribution to the artist(s) involved, and be unmodified. Bonus points if you include a link back to their website. When in doubt, use a reverse image search to try to find the original version. Repeat offenders will have their posts removed, be temporarily banned from posting, or if all else fails, be permanently banned from posting.
    • Attributions include, but are not limited to, watermarks, links, or other text or imagery that artists add to their comics to use for identification purposes. If you find a comic without any such markings, it would be a good idea to see if you can find an original version. If one cannot be found, say so and ask the community for help!
  5. 📋 Post Formatting

    • Post an image, gallery, or link to a specific comic hosted on another site; e.g., the author's website.
    • Meta posts about the community should be tagged with [Meta] either at the beginning or the end of the post title.
    • When linking to a comic hosted on another site, ensure the link is to the comic itself and not just to the website; e.g.,
      ✅ Correct: https://xkcd.com/386/
      ❌ Incorrect: https://xkcd.com/
  6. 📬 Post Frequency/SPAM

    • Each user (regardless of instance) may post up to five (5 🖐) comics a day. This can be any combination of personal comics you have written yourself, or other author's comics. Any comics exceeding five (5 🖐) will be removed.
  7. 🏴‍☠️ Internationalization (i18n)

    • Non-English posts are welcome. Please tag the post title with the original language, and include an English translation in the body of the post; e.g.,
      Sí, por favor [Spanish/Español]
  8. 🍿 Moderation

    • We are human, just like most everybody else on Lemmy. If you feel a moderation decision was made in error, you are welcome to reach out to anybody on the moderation team for clarification. Keep in mind that moderation decisions may be final.
    • When reporting posts and/or comments, quote which rule is being broken, and why you feel it broke the rules.
Banned Artists

The following artists are banned from the community.

  1. Jago
  2. Stonetoss
  3. GPrime85

It should be noted that when you make reports, it is your responsibility to provide rational reasoning why something should be removed. Saying it simply breaks community rules is not always good enough.

Web Accessibility

Note: This is not a rule, but a helpful suggestion.

When posting images, you should strive to add alt-text for screen readers to use to describe the image you're posting:

Another helpful thing to do is to provide a transcription of the text in your images, as well as brief descriptions of what's going on. (example)

Web of Links
Other Comic Communities of Interest

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Sophie Labelle | Instagram | Bluesky

Transcriptfour frame comic.

first frame shows a typical AI poster that says : All chatgpt flyers look the same, especially with this font! the text above it reads : I won’t go to your event if the poster was made by AI.

second frame shows a still frame from a Hank Green youtube video. text above reads : I won’t read your post or email and I won’t watch your video if they were made with AI.

third frame shows an AI restaurant poster of burgers and chicken in a window. text reads : I won’t patronize your shop or restaurant if it is advertised with AI.

last frame shows an MS paint window with badly written : Your bad art is better than AI slop. text reads : if you can’t take the time or make the effort to interact with me yourself, then why should I do it?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 225 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (58 children)

The Hank Green bandwagon hate really fucking irritates me.

The man, and his brother, have done decades of charity work. Raised millions for all sorts of progressive causes (Pizzamas). Created completely free online educational course videos that I know a large percentage here used in highschool/college (Crash Course). Produced thousands of science videos and topics (SciShow). The pair of them spend their time trying to educate and improve lives in any way they can (VlogBrothers), and give back for everything they have.

Hank makes a video that appears to have AI assistance, and people are ready to drop them on the spot like none of that matters.

Hank even apologized for his reliance on it. Gave receipts that it was never used in any of his other works. Used his experience as a cautionary tale of how AI it take over a process, and promised to do better.

Doesn't matter..... his previous decades of charity. His lifelong commitment to education... irrelevant... people want to hang him out to dry.

The VlogBrothers stretch themselves over complex topics, educational materials, charity events... everything.... FOR FREE. I don't blame Hank for trying to streamline and organize things. I think the man has taken on way more than any one person should do. I think the people jumping on him to make him some kind of pariah are nothing but self-rightious douchebag fuckheads that haven't done even a fraction of good as those two brothers have, and they know it. They want to use this one thing as though it somehow makes them superior, like they ever did a goddamn thing for anyone. Like they could even begin to understand that level of work and charity to do all of that.

The man made a mistake doing too much and these cretins are tearing him down for clout. It's fucking disgusting. Decades of positivity without controversy and yet it has afforded him no grace from the people who readily consume his content.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 86 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's easy to do nothing wrong, it's hard to do something right. Hank Green is a treasure. His brother too.

[–] hazard_iguana@lemmy.world 39 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah, the hate is unwarranted.

As always, there’s people who will basically take the it’s evil no matter what path. If they feel that heavily about AI, they probably shouldn’t be using anything that uses Linux. Which is basically just about everything on the web.

Hank was using it to create some games and do research for his videos. An AI is really good at creating code and for that purpose making a small game. AI can help you research things by finding and searching for things relevant to what you want, but then you need to rely on actually understanding what is being cited.

There are obvious downsides to AI and all the data centers and everything but going about and saying no matter why AI will never use is just a fool errand.

It’s worth push pushing back on data centers and what not And I am involved in several of those movements. But AI bad is just a stupid take, Especially when Hank is using it for all intents and purposes pretty responsibly compared to some people at larger companies.

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 20 points 3 days ago (6 children)

An AI is really good at creating code

I disagree with this statement but at the same time it's probably good enough for whatever he used it for tho, i usually hate vibe coding but in this case i don't care much, he overall did plenty of good and it's not like all his content is AI made, (would've more appreciated if he paid someone to do it tho)

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

it’s probably good enough for whatever he used it for tho

The whole problem is because it wasn't good enough for whatever he used it for tho. It fried his brain and made his videos worse. That's not good enough, that's bad enough. Thankfully, Hank is smart and experienced, so he recognised the problem early enough. Hope it will be so.

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 3 points 3 days ago

Ooh i see, tbh i never saw his videos

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

He seems like good people to me. And Ai seems to be addicting like social media.

[–] bold_omi@lemmy.today 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

There is a difference between hating him and holding him accountable.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

he has been held to account. He already spoke on it. Yet that's not stopping the outrage mob needing a villain to shovel out rage content for clicks.

Because at this point, with this comic, it's not about holding him to account. That's done. At this point, it's farming for clout. Tying to dunk on a man with decades of charity and education because it might get a few likes.

[–] bold_omi@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It is illogical to assume that making people aware of communicative failures in science is done for the sake of clout. Making people aware of a failure in public science communication is a good and responsible thing, even after the event.

It is reasonable to still share the comic because the overall point is valid—even if he already apologized—both because sharing knowledge is good, and because the choice of whether to still watch Hank after his apology is individual; just because you and I forgive him doesn't make it unfair not to trust him as a result of this (I take the stance that I will continue to watch his content as long as he does not repeat this mistake: forgiveness is not permission, after all).

To use his failing as an example of this negative behavior, or to make the choice not to watch his content because of his AI use, is fair. To assume sharing the fact that he did and a resultant choice of the comic author (to not watch that one tainted video, which I also will not watch) were for clout is not fair or reasonable.

[–] raze2012@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Because at this point, with this comic, it’s not about holding him to account.

To remix an old saying: "A controversy can travel halfway around the world before the apology has time to put on its shoes". Sadly most outlets who reported on Hank's AI accusations aren't rushing to say "oh yeah he apologized". Maybe they stick it in an update in the article without changing the headline.

The world sucks. So this will stick around much longer than it needed to.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hzl@piefed.blahaj.zone 16 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

100% agree. People are shitting on Hank because they have literally nothing going on. They've made a hobby out of being outraged, and as a result have nothing more meaningful to contribute.

If they took the time to look into it, they'd realize the line they're using to claim that AI writes his scripts was actually something he himself simply said. Not only did he not outsource his writing to AI, he's honest enough that when people incorrectly accused him of this he disclosed that he does at times use it to aid his research. Not that anyone blathering about it values honesty enough to care.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 16 points 3 days ago

Doesn't matter..... his previous decades of charity. His lifelong commitment to education... irrelevant... people want to hang him out to dry.

that's algorithm driven content platforms for you. youtube recommends to most people videos where people are raging, over the normal content of the channel. even people who don't know him get to see it, or otherwise hear about the rage. then, since many are not watching the new videos youtube will recommend them to fewer people than before. meanwhile the rest of the internet only gets to know about the rage, and decades of good work and charity does not matter at all, because that's the boring past nobody gets to know of. even the original viewer base gets reduced, because many see this fuckup but few remember what the creator is like actually. and the algorithm will surely not help to remember by showing the old videos.

[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Greens are treasures for humanity, and they did a lot of great. But previous achievements shouldn't make you immune to criticism. And this is exact topic that should cause harsh criticisms. Hank is an educator, and the only good educator is one that has absolute trust of his audience. Right now his reaction to a backlash is exactly ideal one so I have good hope for the future, and I'm afraid it might not be so if the backlash wasn't as harsh.
The whole reason Hank is so great is that his team does proper research, and they're not afraid of showing their mistakes and correct them. If they start relying on LLMs, all of that can be thrown out of the window, you couldn't trust anything anymore, LLM's whole thing is that it breaks your brain into relying on it, as evident. A pop science video isn't good at all, if the viewers will have to double check every point.
So this is exactly correct reaction that should be modeled for all such occasions in the future, from both parties actually. And in Green's case, their previous legacy gives them enough social credits, that I totally trust him to be smart enough to reevaluate his processes and come up with safeguards, and if he actually does it, this will award him more trust.
Don't conflate accountability with blind hate.

[–] Protoknuckles@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

It doesn't matter what else you do or did, if you make something with AI, I don't want it. I won't say if he is a good or a bad man, but that was a bad video. Future videos may be good, if they are human constructed.

[–] Randomocity@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 days ago (3 children)

From my understanding only some research was done with Ai, no? Not any actual parts of the video

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 16 points 3 days ago (5 children)

If that's the case, then as long as the "AI research" was thoroughly checked by a human, then I can't imagine how he'd have even been caught using AI. So, it's strange that he was caught.

If it wasn't thoroughly checked by a human, then that's a pretty big mistake... but if it was actually only done for one video, I would view this as something that could be a learning experience more than something that deserves cancellation. Still a huge mistake, though.

[–] SailorFuzz@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

It was a very niche topic about crocheting or something, I think? The problem is that he didn't know about it, so he was researching it as part of the script. And because he didn't know about it, he didn't realize that some of the information was wrong. Well, the crochet community knew it was wrong, because of course they'd know more about the topic. So that got people questioning how Hank could have come to this wrong information which led to people further dissecting the video and concluding that it was AI assisted.

So, Hank, a human, looks to learn about a topic he wants to talk about it. He, a human, does check the material, but he's not really qualified to know if the material is right (hence wanting to learn about it).

I think what he should do (and I think he kind of touched on this, but I don't know where) is he should reach out to experts in that field to verify his scripts. Rather than just trying to verify them himself. Especially if its about a topic he's not super confident in.

But most importantly... none of that makes the man out to be some kind mega villain, AI-slop loving, earth killing hypocrite that people are making him out to be. Just a dude who wanted to talk about something and made a mistake. And yet people want to run him through some kind of humiliation ritual and penance. It's sad.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 20 points 3 days ago (3 children)

What you're describing doesn't count as checking the material to me. If I was tasked with double-checking AI research on a topic where I had zero knowledge, I would use a search engine to find some reliable-looking source that said the same thing as the AI.

If you find a second source, then you should be able to point at that page to day where you got it from.

If the fact is so esoteric that you can't find any reliable second sources, then you have to start questioning where did the AI get the information in the first place, and suspect that the facts were hallucinations.

To me, that's what you have to do to check AI. I do this process even if I am just googling something for myself and am presented with an AI summary that seems on-point.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nogooduser@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

If that's the case, then as long as the "AI research" was thoroughly checked by a human, then I can't imagine how he'd have even been caught using AI. So, it's strange that he was caught.

I just did a search on it and apparently someone said that a particular sentence in the video sounded like it was written by AI. He said that it wasn’t written by AI and in fact wasn’t written at all as it was ad-libbed during filming. He then confessed that he has been relying too much on Chat GPT for research and that his script did sound too much like AI.

Kotaku article

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 7 points 3 days ago

The more that people are exposed to generative AI, the more they're going to sound like it. Just like how kids pick up the mannerisms of their parents and of their friends.

One sentence sounding like AI might even be something you'd pick up from a friend who used AI and started talking like that, so it could even happen to a person who never used AI themselves.

I'm sure this sort of thing is already happening, and I'm sure it will only get worse.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] hzl@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If you cared enough to actually find out what happened instead of mindlessly parroting the Twitter mob, you would know that not a single word Hank said was written by AI.

[–] Protoknuckles@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

So he claims. But at the least he was over-relying on AI for research, so the content was subpar. Like I said, it wasn't a good video. Future videos can be. I am not making a moral judgment.

load more comments (1 replies)

Hey, not trying to agree or disagree with you, I genuinely don't know who this person is and have absolutely no stakes in this fight. But I think you touched on something interesting and I'd like to offer some food for thought, not as a good thing that should be accepted, just something to take into consideration.

I grew up worshipping Lady Gaga, she was a huge factor for me coming out of the closet. Like she was a crucial part of my history because she did the "love the gays" thing around the same time I realized I was gay. Like this may sound stupid and probably is, but I genuinely felt deep affection, admiration and gratitude for her.

Then I found out she might be a zionist. The only source I found was Israeli propaganda, but she never denied it or addressed the genocide in any way. By that time I wasn't even paying attention to her or listening to her songs, she was basically a fond memory to me, and it still devastated me.

It took me months to realize that I didn't give a single fuck about the majority of the MCU cast (and hollywood, and most of everything that comes from the US) being full of confirmed zionists and zionist propaganda and I was still watching it, because I never cared about those people the way I cared about Lady Gaga.

You may call this hypocrisy and you're probably right, but what I'm trying to say is people aren't always rational enough to notice it. I still feel deeply hurt by Lady Gaga's silence, even as an adult who's well aware of how pathetic it makes me. My parassocial bond with her was formed when I was a vulnerable teenager going through a lot of bullshit and I didn't have anything better to get attached to and draw hope from. So even now I still feel a lot more disappointed about her silence than others' vocal support for genocide, even knowing it makes no sense. Because I never gave a fuck about them, so there's no parassocial feeling of betrayal or disappointment.

Idk, there's that saying about not bringing flowers all the time and as much as I hate it, it may be on to something. At this point I'm convinced most popular sayings have at least some tiny truth behind them. Again, not defending any of this, just saying it's a real factor and shouldn't be too surprising when you see it.

[–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

People have been trained by social media to hate pretty much anything on command these days. It doesn't really matter what or who it is, there is always an audience to hate this or that. You'd think that at some point people would get that this is class warfare, but no.

[–] raze2012@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Hank makes a video that appears to have AI assistance, and people are ready to drop them on the spot like none of that matters.

Trust takes a lifetime to build and a second to break. This is no different.

Hank even apologized for his reliance on it. Gave receipts that it was never used in any of his other works. Used his experience as a cautionary tale of how AI it take over a process, and promised to do better.

That's all I care about, though. admitting fault and bettering oneself. I'm not one to think using AI once taints you forever. It's just a slipperly slope to outsourcing your brain, and I don't think Hank is doing that.

load more comments (47 replies)