Vince Gilligan, the creative mind behind “Breaking Bad” and “Better Call Saul,” isn’t mincing words when it comes to artificial intelligence.
The acclaimed showrunner has emerged as one of Hollywood’s most vocal critics of AI technology, calling it “the world’s most expensive and energy-intensive plagiarism machine” and dismissing the industry’s promises as nothing more than “a bag of vapor.”
His harsh assessment comes as the entertainment industry grapples with AI’s rapidly expanding role in content creation. Gilligan’s latest series, “Pluribus,” features a pointed credit that reads: “This show was made by humans”—a deliberate statement in an era when AI-generated content is becoming increasingly prevalent.
“I hate AI,” Gilligan says with bluntness. “I think there’s a very high possibility that this is all a bunch of horses**t. It’s basically a bunch of centibillionaires whose greatest life goal is to become the world’s first trillionaires.”
The timing of Gilligan’s criticism coincides with growing enthusiasm for AI among prominent tech figures. Elon Musk recently predicted on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast that within five to six years, most online content will be AI-generated. Musk envisions a future where traditional apps become obsolete, replaced by AI systems generating real-time video tailored to individual preferences.
“Whatever you can think of, or really whatever the AI can anticipate you might want it’ll show you,” Musk told Rogan, describing what he called a “supersonic tsunami” that will fundamentally reshape digital media consumption.
Rogan himself has become an unexpected champion of AI-generated content, particularly AI-created music covers. The podcast host regularly plays AI-generated soul versions of hip-hop tracks for his guests, sometimes insisting the artificial creations surpass the originals. He’s suggested that if an AI singer were real, they’d be “the number one music artist in the world.”
Yet Rogan’s enthusiasm noticeably dims when AI threatens his own profession. When actress Katee Sackhoff mentioned hearing about AI making “great podcasts,” Rogan quickly dismissed the notion, revealing a double standard that many in creative industries are struggling to reconcile.
Gilligan’s concerns extend beyond simple job displacement. Unlike those who fear AI might replace human artists, he’s more troubled by deeper philosophical implications. “My toaster oven isn’t suddenly Thomas Keller because it heats up a delicious pizza for me,” he notes, suggesting current AI lacks the fundamental humanity that defines true artistry.
His real worry centers on what technologists call “the singularity”—the theoretical point when AI develops genuine consciousness. “If they ever achieve that, then the whole discussion of slavery has to come back into the forefront of the conversation,” Gilligan warns. “These trillionaires are going to want to make money on this thing that is now conscious. Is it then a slave?”
The creator’s skepticism reflects broader anxieties rippling through Hollywood. Rhea Seehorn, Gilligan’s frequent collaborator, recently condemned the concept of an AI “actress” seeking representation from talent agencies. “I’m fine going on the record that I don’t think any agencies should represent that AI actress,” she declared. “Shame on them!”
Gilligan poses a provocative question to audiences increasingly exposed to AI-generated content: “Do you want to be fed a diet of crap? Is there enough calories in a diet of crap to keep you alive? The answer is yeah, probably. You could eat it.” He describes AI content as “like a cow chewing its cud—an endlessly regurgitated loop of nonsense.”
The showrunner also expresses pessimism about meaningful regulation, believing the U.S. will fail to control the technology due to competitive pressure from China. His frustration boils over into sardonic humor: “Thank you, Silicon Valley! Yet again, you’ve f**ked up the world.”
Musk acknowledged similar concerns during his podcast appearance, warning that “anything that is digital, AI is going to take over those jobs like lightning.” He stressed the importance of building AI systems that prioritize truth-seeking, expressing concern about competing platforms “programmed to lie” or skewed by ideological biases.
Seehorn offers a counterpoint of cautious optimism. While acknowledging AI’s capabilities, she emphasizes the irreplaceable value of human experience in art. Even if AI could replicate a Picasso, she argues, “the reason the painting is moving is because of the human experience that went into transferring that art onto the canvas. That matters to me. I think it matters to most people.”
As technology companies invest billions in AI development and predict its imminent dominance of content creation, Gilligan’s voice represents growing resistance from artists who see their craft being reduced to algorithmic output.
