Science videos

[Moontanman]

Is there a place on the site for videos like this and if not should there be? 

 

 

[Phi for All]

I didn't watch it, but I can tell you many of the problems we have with any video. We have no way to quickly check them the way we do a written OP. Videos FORCE members to watch them just to see if they're worth watching. 

If we let you post them because we trust you, how do we apply that evenly to everyone else? It would be a huge extra burden if the staff had to watch them all.

Quoting them is also either difficult, inaccurate, or you have to keep re-watching them. Unless you're discussing the presentation itself, it's not a good way to roundtable between people having a conversation. 

We're still a discussion board, and videos feel too much like lectures. Many who join to post videos don't stick around to talk about them, and that's soapboxing.

We allow general videos introducing an overview of an aspect of science so you can set the stage for those who may not know about it. It wouldn't be out of place to provide a video about gravitational waves before you asked a question about them, allowing everyone an option to watch or not. As long as the members can participate without having to watch, videos aren't a problem.

[Moontanman]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

I didn't watch it, but I can tell you many of the problems we have with any video. We have no way to quickly check them the way we do a written OP. Videos FORCE members to watch them just to see if they're worth watching. 

If we let you post them because we trust you, how do we apply that evenly to everyone else? It would be a huge extra burden if the staff had to watch them all.

Quoting them is also either difficult, inaccurate, or you have to keep re-watching them. Unless you're discussing the presentation itself, it's not a good way to roundtable between people having a conversation. 

We're still a discussion board, and videos feel too much like lectures. Many who join to post videos don't stick around to talk about them, and that's soapboxing.

We allow general videos introducing an overview of an aspect of science so you can set the stage for those who may not know about it. It wouldn't be out of place to provide a video about gravitational waves before you asked a question about them, allowing everyone an option to watch or not. As long as the members can participate without having to watch, videos aren't a problem.

I see your point, this video is science and i was thinking of the videos that give links to papers and such they are talking about but I see the problem with who would police it and how.

 

[swansont]

It’s also OK to post videos as a response, under similar caveats. You should summarize and if it’s covering more than one topic, point out the time stamp of the relevant material. Nobody wants to wade through a >20 minute video to see a 30-second answer. It’s like providing an answer and a citation giving more detail for those who are interested in more depth and/or confirmation 

[Phi for All]

I really find it annoying when someone replies to me with a video-only response, especially when it comes after several written posts (got one this morning). It always seems lazy to me, like they can't find their own words for their own arguments, or like they can't be bothered so they outsource their reply. I never watch them. 

[Sensei]

45 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I really find it annoying when someone replies to me with a video-only response, especially when it comes after several written posts (got one this morning). It always seems lazy to me, like they can't find their own words for their own arguments, or like they can't be bothered so they outsource their reply. I never watch them. 

That depends on length and quality of video. Less than 5 minutes, and with the real science, are ok. Like "mine" 42 seconds long photon-atom interactions video. I got numerous up-votes for it. "A picture is worth a thousand words". But it must be high quality picture..

 

 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Sensei

[Phi for All]

13 minutes ago, Sensei said:

That depends on length and quality of video. Less than 5 minutes, and with the real science, are ok. Like "mine" 42 seconds long photon-atom interactions video. I got numerous up-votes for it. "A picture is worth a thousand words". But it must be high quality picture..

But you have the decency to add some context with words, along with your video. That wasn't the behavior I was referring to at all. 

And we still have the same problems. WE have to watch them to judge if they're good enough quality to watch. And if we allow "yours"....

[swansont]

54 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I really find it annoying when someone replies to me with a video-only response, especially when it comes after several written posts (got one this morning). It always seems lazy to me, like they can't find their own words for their own arguments, or like they can't be bothered so they outsource their reply. I never watch them. 

If I asked who the murderer was, I don’t want a video as the only response. At least put “the butler did it, in the conservatory, with the candlestick” If you want to add a video that amplifies the answer and gives much more detail, fine. I don’t think you have to re-invent the wheel, though. If there’s a video or link that spells out the detail, I’m fine with that as supporting info

[Strange]

20 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Is there a place on the site for videos like this and if not should there be? 

I think Phi for All has mentioned most of my problems with videos. There are a couple of other problems, that I have.

One is that listening to a video is not always easy. Sometimes, I am able to find a pair of headphones and listen but not always. And it is rare that a video is worth the effort. There are subtitles on that video but because they seem to automatically generated with no punctuation or sentence breaks and broken into short lines they are really hard to read.

Also (and this is probably the biggest): pacing. That video is nearly 7 minutes long. I could read the content in less than a minute? There is one useful image (the comparison of filter shapes) the rest is all just random background images.

The two papers are mentioned but, because it is a video, there are no links to them. And I can't copy and paste the titles to search for them. I have to freeze the video, retype the title and search for it.

So why make it a video? What does video add? It only seems to have negatives. I just can't see any advantages.

There are occasions where someone uses a large number of diagrams and animations, or does demonstrations, that a video can add something. (I have posted occasional videos, myself.) But that is incredibly rare. It just seems to me to be the second worst format for delivering information. Especially in a place that is text and image based (the best media for delivering information).

[Phi for All]

5 minutes ago, swansont said:

If I asked who the murderer was, I don’t want a video as the only response. At least put “the butler did it, in the conservatory, with the candlestick” If you want to add a video that amplifies the answer and gives much more detail, fine. I don’t think you have to re-invent the wheel, though. If there’s a video or link that spells out the detail, I’m fine with that as supporting info

<embedded YT video with vague title as a substitute for my part of our discussion>

[Sensei]

Just now, Phi for All said:

<embedded YT video with vague title as a substitute for my part of our discussion>

That's how vloggers work..

They make counter-video for opponent video and putting on YT on their channel.

click_counter++; if( ( click_counter % 1000 ) == 0 ) usd_counter++; (just approximate pseudo-code)

 

[Moontanman]

Damn, anyone else want to stomp me? There are videos that are just the equivalent of scandal rags, then there are videos that deliver real science quite often with the contents in print and links to papers. thunderf00t comes to mind as well as isaac arthur, Potholer54, the list of really good informational channels would take at least a page and that is just the ones I know of... Yes there are many more than are just fluff but I strongly disagree with print being the best way to convey information. It might be for us, I love to read, I read very fast with almost 100% recall, or least I did when I was young, I'm not sure i know shit from shinola in recent years but I have to say that while science forums and the internet have expanded my horizons by many orders of magnitude but youtube has as well. many people have problems reading and visual representations of concepts do a much better job. 

Just like there are numerous sites that proclaim to be science forums but are really disinformation at some point you have to figure out who is worth listening too... I've been doing it for about 20 years now, I still get punked occasionally but I can spot the chumps most of the time... 

yes figuring out who is real and who is bs can be difficult but it's not a crap shoot and good channels generally continue to be good if not get better. I know the channel PBS space time has expanded my ability to think about thinks that I could never understand the math involved.  AronRa's video series on evolution opened my eyes to a new level of understanding. 

The future is video and that depends on separating the wheat from the chaff, probably too much for this site but it is going on and will have to continue... 

Potholer54, who used to be a science correspondent, has some videos that should be required watching, his delivery of facts and humor is classic... 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Moontanman

[swansont]

The point isn’t to stomp you. It’s just that the staff discussed this and related issues, with input from members, some time ago. We covered points and counterpoints, which shaped our policy.

[Moontanman]

Just now, swansont said:

The point isn’t to stomp you. It’s just that the staff discussed this and related issues, with input from members, some time ago. We covered points and counterpoints, which shaped our policy.

I was just being sarcastic, I understand the what and the why but I think ignoring the issue is a mistake. Education is going in the direction of video medium, good or bad, video is taking over even fiction.... Resistance is futile... Individuals can now make mini movies of equal or better quality than we see on TV. Assimilation is going to be glorious! 

[Ghideon]

My opinion: 

Video content quality is to me quite personal; I appreciate some scientific videos that others don't like and vice versa making it tricky to find videos that the general public on this forum would like. There are a some cases where videos are usable, for instance when showing kids various areas of science. Other cases are already mentioned above. But such videos may not generally be suitable for these forums.

If I would post videos I think I would try to make it a dual purpose: 
Any member interested in videos should be able to draw conclusions about if they believe the video is worth watching.
The description and context about the video should trigger, or at least have the potential to trigger,  interesting scientific discussions on the topic, among all members, even those with no interests in watching this (or any) video. 

Edited June 9, 2019 by Ghideon
grammar and spelling

[StringJunky]

I have noticed an increasing dearth of textual citations in favour of video formats... they are too slow to process,  They turn me off. Science is facts not pretty pictures.

Edited June 9, 2019 by StringJunky

[Moontanman]

9 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I have noticed an increasing dearth of textual citations in favour of video formats... they are too slow to process,  They turn me off. Science is facts not pretty pictures.

I may not be communicating this very well but let me try again. One of the reasons science turns off so many is that reading the papers or even reading about science is a big dull boring chore for many if not most. I remember being in school and many kids just couldn't connect what they were reading with reality. Videos do this quite well and pretty pictures are much easier to pay attention to than pages of text.  

[Strange]

16 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

I may not be communicating this very well but let me try again. One of the reasons science turns off so many is that reading the papers or even reading about science is a big dull boring chore for many if not most. I remember being in school and many kids just couldn't connect what they were reading with reality. Videos do this quite well and pretty pictures are much easier to pay attention to than pages of text.  

I guess everyone's experience is different. For me, it is reading about science that has always been most exciting. TV programs and videos nearly always leave me underwhelmed. They can be entertaining, but they are usually shallow.

I expect younger people today are more focussed on videos as a learning medium. (And, naturally, I think this is disastrous!)

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

Damn, anyone else want to stomp me?

(Missed this post, before.)

I don't think anyone is stomping on you, I'm certainly not. 

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

I was just being sarcastic, I understand the what and the why but I think ignoring the issue is a mistake. Education is going in the direction of video medium, good or bad, video is taking over even fiction.... Resistance is futile... Individuals can now make mini movies of equal or better quality than we see on TV. Assimilation is going to be glorious! 

But as you say, the issue isn't being ignored. Lots of the really good science communicators out there produce videos. I have even recommended some of them!

But that doesn't mean this forum is the right place for them (except as supporting material). 

Maybe a thread for recommended science communicators and their media (YT, Twitter, etc.) would achieve what you want?

[beecee]

48 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I have noticed an increasing dearth of textual citations in favour of video formats... they are too slow to process,  They turn me off. Science is facts not pretty pictures.

My own process is firstly to gather what info I need from a reliable reputable source, and sometimes that for the uninitiated can be difficult.

Science videos are the same. As a member who does post them when I see them needed, I do try and make sure they are "short and sweet" and to the point. Also videos I believe are more appreciated by younger folk. One of my favourites and one I have posted many times is the Richard Feynman/magnetism and "why"explanation video.

26 minutes ago, Strange said:

I guess everyone's experience is different. For me, it is reading about science that has always been most exciting. TV programs and videos nearly always leave me underwhelmed.

That certainly can be the case. 

Quote

 Lots of the really good science communicators out there produce videos. I have even recommended some of them!

Again sorting the wheat from the chaff is all that is needed. Sean Carroll has some excellent videos out there, although one or two a bit long.....Carl Sagan I have always classed as the best science educator of our time. Who could forget his original "Cosmos" series in the seventies!

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

I may not be communicating this very well but let me try again. One of the reasons science turns off so many is that reading the papers or even reading about science is a big dull boring chore for many if not most. I remember being in school and many kids just couldn't connect what they were reading with reality. Videos do this quite well and pretty pictures are much easier to pay attention to than pages of text.  

I'm just speaking for myself mate. At 57, fossilisation is advanced, The nature of the world around us, as we understand it scientifically, is necessarily an abstraction and someon'e's visualisation isn't necessarily going to get you closer to the underlying principles, which are usually mathematical. 

[Moontanman]

1 minute ago, StringJunky said:

I'm just speaking for myself mate. At 57, fossilisation is advanced, The nature of the world around us, as we understand it scientifically, is necessarily an abstraction and someon'e's visualisation isn't necessarily going to get you closer to the underlying principles, which are usually mathematical. 

I'm 64 but my math skills are limited and my mind operates on analogy very good. I struggled for years trying to understand why FTL is not thought to be possible but one video cleared it up for me in a few minutes...  

[Phi for All]

Perhaps mixing the mediums is where we go wrong. There's nothing wrong with learning from a well-produced, accurate video. I think US schools should make watching overview videos be the student's homework, and use the teacher's time in class for specific work in the subject. It's not a bad way to learn.

But discussion on forums like this is all about the written word. Threads should be conversations, not lectures. You learn in a different way when you're talking with peers in a reasoned manner about the bits of knowledge you all share. 

A video is like going out to a restaurant for your dinner. A discussion forum is more like we're all in the kitchen preparing the meal together. Both are great in their way, but mixing them doesn't make either any better.

[beecee]

50 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

A video is like going out to a restaurant for your dinner. A discussion forum is more like we're all in the kitchen preparing the meal together. Both are great in their way, but mixing them doesn't make either any better.

One can I believe compliment the other at times.

Not sure if the following is a valid analogy, but I remember first seeing the movie, [imo the greatest movie ever made] , 2001; A Space Odyssey. While I was infatuated and loved the movie, I was not absolutely sure of its exact meaning/s, and actually saw it 5 more times in the space of about 12 months! Still, that nagging doubt about the exact meaning lingered. Then I purchased the book! Bingo!!! It cleared it up for me admirably and I was ecstatic!

[Moontanman]

I am going to poke the bear one more time on this, i hope all who were interested enough to comment on this thread will comment on this short science video. Video is IMHO the next wave of education and the ease of making such videos requires that the scientific community get on top of it as quickly as possible. 

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but illusion of knowledge.” — Stephen Hawking

Dimissing, ridiculing, or even ignoring this situation will allow what is known as pseudoscience to continue to gain control of the narrative and now that anyone with a pulse and a keyboard can make a video we need to start giving our support to those who make real videos as opposed to those who make pretend reality videos and pass them off as real. many people are at the forefront  of this new medium and a few are doing their best to keep the medium as honest as possible. Thunderf00t, potholer54,  and AronRa are at the forefront of this debunking but AronRa's message is being diluted by his Atheist activism IMHO. Here is the kind of Videos that are beginning to crop up, this is a classroom assignment if i read it correctly. 

 

 

[Phi for All]

I want to discuss science, but I don't want to discuss science videos. AFAIC, they're the homework you should definitely use to build your knowledge, so you can come here and discuss it with peers.

If there was a suggestion about how to police these videos so they don't take up so much staff time, I missed it. Again, popularity, value, and availability aren't being questioned. I want to know how we allow the ones Moontanman approves but not the ones that other members want to post. You all don't see all the first-time posters that are spamming videos of their profoundness.