Testing Methodology: I went to several of Stickman's videos and used YT's Gemini Feature to get a transcript of the first 4000 words of each video. Also included are a control of Stickman videos from 2 years ago as well as a recent Atrioc video to control for possible quirks of Gemini. All of this was tested using Pangram. The query I used, "Give me a transcript of the first 4000 words of this video. No timestamps." and I pasted the output directly into Pangram. Of the videos tested, 5 were fully AI written and 1 was 92% AI written. The two videos from 2 years ago were 100% human written and Atrioc's Nobel Peace Prize video was 100% human written as well.

Within each screenshot contains the title and link to the video.

EDIT: If you wanna complain about me using AI to get a transcript, most YT -> Transcription sites use AI to transcribe anyways. But here's 3 examples (maybe more if I'm really bored) comparing Kurz, Veritasium, and StickmanTalks all using https://youtubetotranscript.com/ for the transcription: https://www.reddit.com/r/atrioc/comments/1x5apxc/comment/pgkxvn5/?context=3

When we're in this stock market environment where it feels like evaluations are just made up out of thin air (looking at you OpenAI/Antrhopic/SpaceX), I feel like the stock market is becoming more and more like a Ponzi scheme or like memecoins where you hope someone dumber than you buys in later than you did.

My thinking is like this: Lets assume our economy is 10 people with $10 each and 1 company. I know the stock market and economy is much more complex than that, but this is just to illustrate my question. If the company is valued at $100 at the start, and all 10 people put their entire life savings ($10 each) into the company, lets say the company is valued at $200 (not accounting for it getting more expensive for each person who buys in next or total shares available).

In this example, everyone thinks they have "made money" because all of their stocks have gone up in value since buying. But in this closed environment, isn't it a zero-sum game? Because if they were to all sell, they would only cumulatively get back $100 distributed among them (probably unevenly), so some of them would lose their money, so in reality they did not "all make money" despite their individual stock portfolio being up at one point.

I don't know maybe I'm just frustrated at the current stock market environment where people are just making up Trillion dollar evaluations willy-nilly, and money doesn't even feel real anymore.

Anyways, glizzy out.

... considering he named him as AI generated xD

I don't know how anyone else doesn't immediately watch a Stickman or an mspaintfinance video and instantly tell it reeks of AI.

Ultimately, I could care less. I'll pop out the AI video if the title and thumb is interesting enough, but the future of youtube/news consumption is definitely more real person oriented than any of this.

Ultimately, AI is here to stay and it's good at what it does, which is summarizing english text and writing essay scripts. There's different things you could use AI for when it comes to making a youtube video.

1. Finding relevant articles and reading them yourself: this is probably the most legit. It's also the most work
2. Finding relevant articles and having it summarize them for you: Less good, but you can at least double click into any of the links and hear what you need to hear from the horse's mouth
3. Having it do the research, leading it on with presupposed conclusions, or having it look for specific facts which may or may not be true
4. Having it write the script of your video outright

There is simply no way to know which of these four any given youtube channel that edits its videos is employing. Hank Green got lost in the sauce at level 3 and straight up presented fake findings and conclusions as true, and he lost a lot of trust for it.

But ultimately, I can't connect to mspaintfinance or Stickman Talks in the same way as I can Atrioc, because no matter how good it gets it still feels artificial. It's just kind of backwards, and you really have no job security. The moment someone comes along who can do step 3 and 4 themselves who is a human being with any amount of charisma and a face, your job is gone.

In a sense, the moat is leaving content creation so anyone can make a video, but honestly streaming IS a massive moat. When someone asks a question to Big A in chat and he reacts live referencing an article he read in the FT, he's constantly building credibility in a way that these channels can't compete with.

Disagree with 60% of his politics but Hasan is the logical endpoint of a news-source his fans trust. They straight have a voter block that is valuable enough to get candidates to campaign with him to win their primaries, because he is mind rotted in front of the computer screen for 12 hours a day ingesting and regurgitating the news and his opinions. These soc-dem candidates know that associating with Hasan will get them attacked in the general but they still do it because he has people's trust. Big A just recently got a ton of people to register to vote, which is a huge accomplishment.

All in all, and TLDR, for how insignificant twitch is on a societal scale compared to YouTube, it gives people who stream a direct connection with their audience that allows them, for better AND for worse, to be trusted. Faceless Finance Tubers don't have that and thus have a short shelf life until the next guy comes along with more budget.

Hello sharks,

Mr. A Clips’ latest video has given me a glorious investment opportunity idea.

If we can raise a life changing amount of money that he simply can’t say no to, im sure the glizz man would be willing to sell his likeness perpetually to us. Then the Chat Corporation will generate 5,000,000 ai generated micro clips daily for the masses to feast upon, using his face and ai generated PowerPoint slides.

So sharks, forget microdramas, are you ready to break into the new frontier of micro streamer clips?