Transcription
Step into the future where life is faster, funnier, and more futuristic than ever.
By the year 2000, the United States will have a 30-hour work week and month-long vacations as the rule. The year 2000, um, I think I'll probably be the spaceship to the moon, dictating robots, to robots.
This integrated workstation incorporates a complete office in one unit. Unlike human housemaids, Mabel never tires, never grumbles, never takes a day off. No one's excited for 2100. Have you noticed that?
I feel like we have a really dystopian future ahead of us. Technology in quite a lot of ways has actually made things significantly more difficult. Apple announced iOS 26 today and this thing is an absolute disaster. Why are modern appliances so terrible?
Is it just me or is AI making everything worse right now? I don't know about you, but I'm finding it harder and harder to like even fathom or look at the future.
Take a trip with me to the future, if you will. Imagine stepping into a city that breathes with life. The air is clean. The streets are silent, carrying only the faint hum of electric machines hard at work. The buildings in front of you are lined with solar panels powering the businesses inside. And in the distance, there's a mixture of wind turbines, nuclear power plants, and geothermal wells supplying energy to the wider community. Rooftop gardens crown the cityscape, growing local fresh food while simultaneously providing thermal cooling for the occupants within. The city is bustling, but not chaotically, rather in a communal way. Thanks to the increased productivity of automation, much of our work has been taken off our plates, giving people shorter work days, longer vacations, and the freedom to reconnect as social beings, the way we were meant to be. Beyond the city, we see aquaponic farms growing and irrigated with freshly desalinated ocean water, managed, of course, by AI systems that optimize for water use, energy consumption, and waste, all in perfect balance. It's a beautiful place to live, but you're probably asking yourself, is this really our future? Because as inspiring as this image is, it doesn't really feel like we're heading in that direction, does it? And I don't know about you, but as we're closing in on the end of 2025, I feel like our technological progress should have taken us farther by this point. The truth is, holding on to the optimistic visions of our future on which our culture is founded is getting increasingly more difficult. Back in the 60s, people imagined the world of tomorrow as shiny, clean, and full of promise. And I wouldn't really use those words to describe what we're living in now. Because while every year brings a dazzling new array of technological advancements, it's hard not to wonder if all of these innovations have actually made our lives measurably better. So, that's what we're going to get into today. Why technology may be doing more harm than good, what went wrong with the future we imagined, and whether that dream is still within reach.
As far back as humanity's story goes, technology worked towards improving our lives. Not without some complications or consequences, of course, but overall the impact has been a net positive. To go through the classics real quick, we have the wheel, the printing press, the light bulb, and sewage systems. Each one reshaping society by raising the standards of health, knowledge, and quality of life. Our desire to solve problems and leave the world better than we left it is deeply rooted in our DNA. as the hope for a brighter future drives innovation forward generation after generation. Nowhere was this optimism clearer than in the midentth century where visions of the future were the hottest topic and one of excitement with shows like the Jetsons of course displaying this idealic picture of a world with flying cars, robot helpers, automation at work, food machines and of course space tourism. But since then, we seem to have lost our direction as technology has for the most part stopped improving our lives and often is hindering us instead. Somehow the same spirit of innovation that once gave us the first automobile now has led us to things like Bluetooth water bottles. It's as if things have continued to progress but not necessarily improve.
There's no denying that technology has infused convenience into our lives that our ancestors couldn't have fathomemed. With a few taps on a screen, we can summon food to our doorstep, video chat with someone across the globe or easily navigate a foreign city without bothering to learn the local language. The world has become high tech, but only in the most superficial sense of the phrase.
Would you ever pay $400 for a juicer? No. What if I told you it can connect to Wi-Fi? Still no? What if I told you that it doesn't juice fruit, but you have to buy proprietary, overpriced juice packs? Still no? What gives? In all seriousness, obviously, nobody would ever buy this product. But shockingly, it was real. In mid 2016, the Juicero finally hit the market. It retailed at $400, had to be connected to Wi-Fi to function, and instead of juicing actual fruit, required proprietary juice packs.
Now, while it would be silly to say that today's technology hasn't improved our lives at all, it does feel like we've crossed over this line of mostly improving to mostly getting in the way.
At what point are we going to decide that laptops and iPads are thin enough? Because I personally have stepped on my laptop before and will step on my laptop again. And if y'all keep making it that skinny, it's going to snap in half.
An easy example of this is the smartphone, which has revolutionized the human experience by connecting us to the world and putting the sum of human knowledge at our fingertips. But also, they're eroding our agency and autonomy, trapping us in the addictive cycles of the attention economy. We stare at our phones non-stop, and even though we're all now connected, we have no social ability to connect. Then within that, there are things like gig economy apps that allow you to be your own boss, but with no pay stability or work benefits. Always listening smart devices like Alexa and Google Home add convenience to our lives, but as we've talked about previously, at the cost of constant data harvesting. We celebrate the ability to work remotely, but this same technology shackles us to an always on work culture that blurs the lines between professional and personal life. And so we work non-stop because our bosses and colleagues can access us from midnight to midnight.
Technology in quite a lot of ways has actually made things significantly more difficult for us. Let's take communicating for example. If you wanted to send a message to somebody that you could not immediately travel to, say 300 years ago, the only way you would do that would be by writing a letter. But today, if you'd like to send that same message to somebody that you cannot immediately travel to, you wouldn't send a letter. You'd send an email. A process that used to take weeks can now happen within a fraction of a second. So now that same person that would only write a letter on issues that truly mattered will now write emails on every single small thing that they can think of. Which is why so many people even with absolutely no position of authority in their life whatsoever will find themselves having to respond to 50 different emails a day. And because of how easy it is to respond to an email, if you take too long to respond, it'll look like you're lazy because writing back is so easy. It only takes a second. So we've made the process of writing letters significantly easier by not having to do it by hand and by making it such that you don't have to wait weeks in between each message. But by doing this, we've given ourselves significantly more letters to write. The process is physically easier, but mentally it's a lot more strenuous.
We also benefit from a world where we can shop online from the comfort of our own homes, but at the cost of local streets becoming ghost towns and the communal aspect of life being eroded by convenience. I could go on. And now we have AI thrown into the mix, making creativity more accessible than ever, but also leaving us in a world of deep fakes and disinformation. Like, you know, things are going downhill when we can't even trust Google searches anymore. Not that you could ever take them as gospel, but still, now they just give you straight up fake information from their AI overview. Why is Google so much worse these days? I'm having an easier time finding a will to live than finding anything on Google. Google search, a core pillar of the internet, is completely broken. It fails to deliver results that are a useful and b earned in a fair manner. Instead, it favors sponsored posts and paid ads. It exerts its power and influence to control the pecking order. And of course, the worst update of all, generated AI overviews that pull from sources like Reddit as a source of truth. Google is quickly becoming the spam it spent the last 20 years trying to fight. And that's just one side of AI. There's also, of course, the disruption to the job market and the environmental toll from energy hungry data centers using up all of our freshwater systems. This is my cold water pressure in the kitchen. This is where I fill up water for storage. Those are the things we have to fill up to flush the toilets.
So, you can see the sediment from the data center.
Wow. And that's just from the water coming out of your faucet.
Yeah. The global AI demand may even require 4.2 to 6.6 6 billion cubic meters of water withdrawal in 2027, which is more than the total annual water withdrawal of Denmark or half of the United Kingdom. If the US hosts half of the global AI workloads, the operation of AI may take up to 0.5 to 0.7% of its total annual water withdrawal. And these are just a few examples of why it feels like most technologies coming out today offer such minor benefits when compared to the drawbacks that come alongside them. I think everybody misses when technology was just enough. Like it was just enough advancement and fun for it to be something that was interesting and enjoyable, but it wasn't so overarching. Like now technology is in every single facet of our lives and it has sucked the life out of so many enjoyable things. As said here, the grand internet experiment is slowly derailing. The technologies that 50 years ago we could only dream of in science fiction novels have been co-opted into tools of surveillance, behavioral manipulation, radicalization, and addiction. And then on top of that, even the technologies that do more good for us still have massive problems that are often overlooked. Like the rise in electric cars helping to reduce carbon emissions is a great net positive for humanity. when you don't look at the lithium, cobalt, and nickel mines that are destroying habitats and exploiting workers. Along the same vein, there's the environmental impact that comes with the rapid turnover of modern tech products. Often, these devices have a predetermined short life expectancy of just a few years, where previously the standard of 20th century applications like washing machines, fridges, and TVs was decades. I think all of our appliances in the '9s were just better because not only did they last longer and they worked, but you could fix anything in your house by hitting it.
We're now dealing with an epidemic of e-waste destroying our environment at an exponential rate. Last year alone, it was reckoned that more than 50 million tons of e-waste was generated globally, with only around 20% of it officially recycled. Half of the 50 million tons represented large household appliances and heating and cooling equipment. The remainder was TVs, computers, smartphones, and tablets. Overall, we've entered a stage of technology that makes our life faster, not better, despite what's advertised to us.
Excuse me, can I park here? Of course. Do you have the app? I do have the app. Whatever app you think you have, download four more because it's not the app we use. Okay, I've downloaded every parking app under the sun. Can I proceed? No. Put the location code in. I've already put it in. Put it in again. sake. I've got to be somewhere in 20 minutes. Forget that. This is going to take you a solid half hour at least.
The most recent example again being from the AI movement. Many claim that this revolution will give people the freedom to work less as AI takes on much of their workload. Sounds like the idealic future we've dreamed of, right? Like finally, we've arrived at the Jetson's phase of humanity where just like Mr. Jetson, we too can only put in a 1-hour workday because everything else is automated. Or so we wish. The problem is that this narrative, which is nice to dream about, doesn't align with the latestage capitalist society we live in. Because what the AI revolution actually means is that now corporations have the ability to extract and exploit more out of workers. I mean, just look at all the time freed up by AI. And this is happening as we speak. I know people who have gone to meetings where managers discuss what they can add to their plate now that they've offloaded so much to Claude. Are we accomplishing more and less time or simply rushing through life with technology urging us on? The allure of multitasking powered by tech is fracturing our attention span and the quality of our work and the depth of our engagement with the world around us are suffering. And maybe this is coming off a very Gen Z doesn't want to work, but I think this traditional mindset is just the brainwashing of multiple generations where you got praised for overextending yourself. Like everyone would be so much happier if the work we pass off to AI meant we could finally get on board with the 6-hour workday. As studies have shown that even without AI, productivity doesn't go down. But moving on, what I think this all goes to show is that we've passed the point of technology progressing the noble cause of humanity because tech companies aren't thinking about humanity. While technology has streamlined the minutici of our daily routines, it has not elevated our quality of life to the exalted heights forecast by the pundits and profits of Silicon Valley. Ours is an age of marginal convenience, not measurable betterment.
[Music] So, what's the alternative here? Because despite many of us having an innate distaste for technology at this point in history,
I think a way to assess how people are kind of feeling about AI right now, like a vibe check, is the emergence of this word clanker, which has been kind of getting me'med around. It's supposed to be a negative way of talking about some of these technologies.
It's not all bad. We've just become so accustomed to corporations exploiting us through tech that our first instinct is to turn up our noses to anything new, assuming the worst. Because in a world where surveillance, capitalism, and planned obsolescence are the norm, it's not hard to be suspicious of every innovation. But we know smartphones in and of themselves aren't harmful. And in a different context, they can actually be beneficial. For those of you on the same side of the internet as me, we saw this last month when Hank Green released his Focus Friend app. And it rose to the ranks as the number one downloaded app in the US. But if you're on the other side of the internet and don't know what I'm talking about, it's an app that gifies productivity by putting you in charge of this little bean who loves to knit. The way it works is the bean knits socks during focus sessions, and the socks can be spent to decorate its little room. The kicker is you can't interrupt the knitting or else it will all unravel and you lose the sock progress. It's a really cool app because it encourages you to focus not with guilt like a lot of other focus apps, but with a genuine caring of this little digital being that you want to have a cozy room. Now, besides the app being super cute, it's cool because it's made to genuinely help people with no secret underlying narrative. It's free to download and there's no data collected or ads on the app. The way their business model works is they keep the lights on by people purchasing new skins for the bean and upgrading the game. But what this goes to show is two things. One, that people don't like living as slaves to technology and want to change. But two, that there is a real possibility of a world where apps are wholesome, good, and helpful.
The main point is that we don't live in a void of harmful technology as we do still have many new innovations that help our lives, including today's sponsor, Ziotics. If you haven't heard of Ziotics, their pre-alcohol probiotic drink is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented by PhD scientists to tackle rough mornings after drinking. Here's how it works. When you drink, alcohol gets converted into a toxic byproduct in the gut. And it's this byproduct, not dehydration, that's to blame for your rough next day. But what Ziotics pre-alcohol does is produces an enzyme to break down that byproduct. So all you have to do is remember to make Zbiotics your first drink of the night. Drink responsibly and feel your best tomorrow. As I've said before, just in the past year, my body started rejecting red wine, which was a huge bummer because I love the communal aspect of getting to share a bottle with friends over dinner. But when I thought all hope was lost, I discovered Ziotics. So, if this is something that interests you, click the link in the description to get 15% off your first order at checkout with free shipping. Plus, Ziotics offers a 100% money back guarantee. If you're not satisfied for any reason, they'll refund your money, no questions asked.
Now, I include all this because I feel like it's been a long time since we've seen technology, let alone an app, that is genuinely constructive, but also because it segus nicely into talking about what it would look like if every corner of the tech industry had this approach to design and production. So, what if we imagined a world where nature, humanity, and technology could not just coexist, but thrive together? one where technology works in harmony with our environment and truly serves the betterment of humanity. While that future isn't just a dream, it exists in the vision of solar punk. Now, while solar punk is technically a literary and artistic aesthetic, it does represent a tangible possibility for how we could live. If you aren't familiar with the term solar punk, think of it as kind of the antithesis of cyberpunk, the dystopian tech heavy world most of us know from media. We see it in movies like Bladeunner, Tron, The Matrix, as well as aspects in Ready Player 1, and even Wall-E. It's a popular theme because it opens our minds up to what could realistically happen if corporations go unchecked, leading to technology advancing as society and the environment collapse. It's a critique of where society is heading, and it forces us to confront the risks of corporate overreach and neglecting the greater good. But Solar Punk, on the other hand, tells a different story. Instead of a bleak, oppressive cityscapes, Solar Punk imagines a bright, hopeful future where innovation and ecology coexist. It's a postc capitalist future that prioritizes ecological balance, community well-being, and social relations over individual profit. Imagine being surrounded by lush natural landscapes, buildings covered with verdant plants and vegetation complete with rooftop gardens, and cities that are completely powered by clean energy. Imagine having our technologies built in harmony with nature and shared equally with everyone on the planet. This is what our world should look like as envisioned by the solar punk movement. It's best known through artwork with images of futuristic cities covered in greenery so that nature and infrastructure fuse seamlessly. In the solar punk vision, corporations are held accountable while people are left to restructure society beyond capitalism to achieve a sustainable and inclusive future. And the cool part is that it's all done with technology, not in spite of it. But interestingly enough, it's not portrayed as much in the media at all compared to cyberpunk. I understand this on one hand because cyberpunk makes for a really easy conflict to build a story around. But I feel like people would eat up solar punk as just a setting where a story is told. But you tell me. We do have some glimpses if not parallels in media though, including Wakanda from Black Panther. not a perfect representation as there's still a monarchy in place, but it shows how technology can be used to enhance our world instead of destroying it. I also found a lot of people online drawing inspiration from Studio Gibli movies as a whole since there isn't one particular movie that portrays solar punk perfectly, but the stories often carry themes of nature interwoven with human life. The thing I love about Solar Punk is that it's not a withdrawal from society and technology, which feels like our only reprive right now, but an adaptation of it. Because as much as I hate on capitalism in my videos, as I've said before, it's not capitalism in and of itself that's the issue. It's latestage capitalism with its unchecked, unrestricted drive for profit above all else that twists what capitalism could be into something destructive. Because while solar punk and cyberpunk are sort of antagonists, solar punk and capitalism are not. There's room for both and there's a need for both as it still requires technological innovation and the entrepreneurial spirit to get us to a place where both thrive. As said here, we still need large-scale capitalism pursuing Jetson style progress, breakthroughs in geothermal, small modular nuclear and fusion, translating those breakthroughs into conversion to indoor farming and cultivated meat, heading out into space to establish a permanent human presence and outsource mining to the asteroid belt and pushing ahead with the AI revolution that will help make all of these other wonders possible. And I don't think that it's much of a stretch to say that most people would prefer this harmonious solar punk future with clean air and water, local food, less waste, healthy lives, and an overall abundance all with the help of modern technology. This is the utopia we long for, right? So, if we're all mostly on the same page, then why can't we seem to get there?
[Music] So, let's talk about what happened to progress. Where are the futuristic cities imagined in the 60s? Where are the solar roadways and bike paths? Where are the green roofed buildings and living walls filtering air? Where's the local yearround food production through sustainable aquaponics? The algae fueled boats and trains, the atmospheric carbon extractors, and the deselination water reservoirs. I could go on. Where is it all? Well, these solar punk dreams aren't science fiction anymore, and they do exist. The technology, for the most part, is out there, but what's missing is largecale adoption. But why is that? Why has progress slowed so dramatically that even though we are innovating and creating, we don't see it implemented into our lives and cities anymore? Compare a city in the 1890s to one in the 1930s, and the transformation is unmistakable. do the same between 1990 and 2025 and the differences are marginal. What we're dealing with is not a lack of imagination or innovation. We're facing an epidemic of stunted application and expansion where technologies that could change our lives never reach the scale where they create the solar punk cities we long for. As said in the book Abundance, throughout the 1950s and 1960s, productivity in the construction sector, how much we could get done given the same number of workers and machines and the same amount of land, grew faster than productivity in the rest of the economy. Then around 1970, it began to fall even as economicwide productivity kept rising. Today, a chasm yawns. A construction worker in 2020 produced less than a construction worker in 1970. At least according to the official statistics.
In 1930, the Empire State Building started construction. It took one year to build this place. It took 2 years to remodel my kitchen. What the hell happened with construction over the last 90 years? Speed it up. And this is a big reason why so many people have lost trust in government because it feels like nothing gets done anymore. As a result, we're a culture that now lives in the past trying to recreate the glory days of the previous century rather than looking forward to what we can make as our own future. To understand why progress has slowed, we need to look back to where the explosive productivity of the early 1900s actually came from. Because it wasn't just all rainbows and butterflies and moonlandings and inventions of the computer mouse. That era's efficiency often came at the cost of chaos. Much was built and created during those decades, but just as much was destroyed or extracted unsustainably. The boom was not clean growth. It was growth fueled by cutting corners and burning through people and resources. For example, we had the expansion of farmland in the 1930s, providing food for a growing population, but leading to the Dust Bowl, which was directly caused by overplowing prairie land for industrial agriculture and stripping the top soil. As well, there was the construction of the Tennessee Valley Authority dams in the 1930s, which brought electricity, flood control, and jobs to that region, but also displaced thousands of families, forcing them to uproot their lives and make room for the reservoirs. Name any major infrastructural advancement from that era, and there were probably hidden costs. So, of course, something had to change and eventually governments were forced to step in, attempting to rein in the mess. And between 1966 and 1973, the US passed almost a dozen laws that required the government to be more responsive to local citizens and the environment. And this was good, right? more regulation on environmental impact, more rights for workers and neighborhoods, more voices from the public on what they wanted rather than just developers taking regardless of the impacts on everyone else. But all this restraint also didn't come without cost. And that cost was the bottlenecking on implementation. Because what ends up happening when you put so many rules on environmental impact and take everyone's voices into account when making decisions is that nearly every project proposed now gets slowed down to a near stop.
Why does government construction take so long? There's an off-ramp that's been under construction next to my office for over 2 years. It's just an off-ramp. They're not completely redoing the highway, just repositioning the off-ramp to reduce traffic, but it's been under construction for 2 years. And on the flip side, there's private apartment buildings being developed opposite where I live. They have demoed this entire shopping center and already starting construction 3 months in. So why does government construction just take so long? I don't understand.
And this is something we're all familiar with, right? Like we know the frustration of government projects going over budget and taking too long, but a lot of the reason for that isn't just inefficiency in office, but because of all the hoops everyone has to jump through just to get the ball rolling. This leads us to projects taking years and years to complete. All the while inflation raises the price of supplies. Labor costs go up with annual wage increases and the interest on the loans for the projects pile up as well. The problem we faced in the 1970s was that we were building too much too heedlessly. The problem we face in the 2020s is that we're building too little and are often paralyzed by process. As said by Larry Selzer, the environmentalist movement evolved to stop bad people from destroying the world. And so we have perfected the art of saying no. But we can't know our way to the kind of growth we need. Unfortunately, we've gotten to the point where some projects that would be revolutionary for cities take too long to complete that they just get cancelled in the end. What has taken so long on highspeed rail in California is not hammering nails or pouring concrete. It's negotiating. Negotiating with courts, with funders, with business owners, with homeowners, with farm owners. These negotiations cost time which costs money. Those negotiations lead to changes in the route or the build or design which costs money. Those negotiations lead to public disappointment and frustration which leads to loss of money that might otherwise have been approved if the project were speeding towards completion. There's one school of thought that says it is worth taking the time to do these projects right. If the reviews and the negotiations and the consultations take a few more years, those are years well spent. But they carry a price tag. Time is a killer on the estimate of a project's cost. When you don't have funding and can't make decisions and can't drive to get operational, and you can't move the ball, the cost is huge. The public loses faith, the politicians begin second-guessing. We've gotten so good at stopping projects that we forgot how to build things in America. And this is the reality of most infrastructural projects as everything gets bogged down in negotiations and complex regulations. And as an offshoot of this, we're also seeing the stifling of infrastructural innovation because no one wants to join in on this hot mess of political turmoil. Patrick Collision, the CEO of the online payments behemoth Stripe, once was asked whether too much talent was flowing into Silicon Valley. I don't think that the ambitious upstarts who go into high-speed rail in America anyway are going to have a great time or have much success in convincing their friends to follow them. And I suspect that for various reasons, too many domains look somewhat like high-speed rail. There's a view that the internet is a frontier of last resort. And I don't think it's totally wrong.
This brings us to the technology sector and how it's almost the opposite of what's going on in the world of infrastructure. Because unlike construction, technology advances are booming left, right, and center. And it's largely because regulation can't keep up as tech moves faster than lawmakers can legislate. But as it turns out, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. And I know I might sound super hypocritical for this because if you've seen any of my videos on technology, you know I love to rant about how there's not enough restraints on the tech industry. But hear me out. I've learned a lot while researching for this video, and it's not so black and white. The reason technology is developing so quickly is because it's one of the few industries that's left to break first and ask for forgiveness later. Yes, this approach can and often does harm, but it also drives rapid innovation. But the point to note here is that this innovation most of the time serves the company's interest, not the public good. And that's the problem, not the speed of which they're working. But what if we could have both? Innovation that doesn't lead to dystopia. It seems like our only two options are either government restraining projects so much that nothing happens or let companies go hog wild with almost no oversight. But what about a middle ground? One that comes from helping guide technology rather than stifling or controlling it. See, right now, aside from private companies using their own resources, much of academic and publicly funded scientific research relies on grants awarded through proposal systems. But what if there's another option where we actively encourage innovation in critical areas through a reward system? This is known as the concept of pull funding where instead of just giving money for projects that companies already want to pursue, you create rewards that pull innovation towards areas we actually need. And it is something that is already being done by the government. But we need more of it. Because if you dangle a carrot in front of the scientific community, someone will go after it and we can actually see these utopian futures come to fruition. Like what if we offered a reward system for the first company to create affordable largescale desalination plants? You know, we'd be drinking ocean water real quick. This is where the government is falling short because they're kind of only doing half their job. They restrict where restrictions are necessary, but they aren't encouraging other avenues at the same time. And we don't want what happened to the infrastructure sector to happen to the technology world either where the government squeezed companies so much that they prevented creation and innovation. The government's role is to control the tides of innovation by pushing and pulling the private sector towards social benefit. And I want to add that I do feel a little bit silly telling the government what to do because I'm literally just a girl with a science background, not in political science. But it's clear that the current approach is not working and we need more incentive to encourage progress, not just damage control.
[Music] Okay, final thoughts. So, this video, while a bit of a downer to start with, felt quite hopeful as a whole as I finished it off. Just being reminded that the future isn't set in stone and we can still make changes to achieve the future we desire. Because right now it can almost feel like we're in a losing battle with technology. If you watched my previous videos, you can probably relate to that. But it can feel like we're struggling to keep it from destroying ourselves and the planet. But it's not an inevitable outcome. Technology itself isn't the enemy. It's a tool. And its impact depends on the intentions of those who build and control it. And in the vision of solar punk, that same tool can be redirected towards healing our world rather than harming it. So, that's the takeaway of this video. I guess you tell me what you think, whether it rang true for you or if you still think we're screwed. Um, I'd love to hear it. But that's all I have for you today. Make sure you subscribe if you haven't. Check out my merch, of course. And if you're looking for some of that solar punk energy, I suggest you put on the Studio Giblly uh soundtrack in the background as you go about your day. That's what I've been doing lately, and it's brought me a lot of peace. So, enjoy that. Bye.
This is amazing. Imagine if this was all servers. Imagine if you had glasses that could make this even brighter. Google Glass, turn this all blue. That would be incredible.
Grass has inspired a thought. There should be a new kind of money that only I can have. I saw Lotus Flower for the first time and the first thing I thought of was what if there was a subscription-based service that allowed poor people to rent this experience.