Science videos

[Moontanman]

1 minute ago, Phi for All said:

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. 

I have conceded your point on the problem of policing them and maybe that is undoable here but my intent is not that (at least now) but more to discuss the role videos are playing and how we can if and we can figure away to begin to support the ones that are good science and deal with the ones that are not. 

This forum may very well not be the time and place to do so but at some point, and I think that point is either fast approaching or here, but we as a science community have to at least discuss the problem of the advance of the video medium. Almost anything can be shown to be true in pretty detailed CGI. I know of a couple of the worst but I won't post them due to not wanting to run up their views. 

What can be done? Can anything be done?   

[Sensei]

Majority of people coming here are posting videos (usually in the couple the first few posts *) they made by themselves with their pet-theories, or theories they support (like flat earthers, or similar nonsense). They place link to their video just to promote the video, to get attention, and viewers. Presence of such video on scientific website is suggesting other members/viewers of the forum, that provided information about pet theory is true and scientific knowledge...

*) couple years ago I even suggested swansont to make filter (or custom PHP script) which will automatically inform moderators about that newbie member made post with some URL.. but received negative response that they (mods) would be flood by notifications. That was prior movement to this new forum software.

ps. Simplified version: videos to make money, not to spread knowledge.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Sensei

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

What can be done? Can anything be done?   

It's two basic problems for us, so the solution should solve both. Video is becoming more popular but we aren't designed well for it, and we need a rating system for videos but vetting them in the first place is too time-consuming and/or unfair. Is there an existing review of the best science videos?

And would we be discussing them? If we choose the best, what would we discuss if the science is already good? Why should they be here at SFN if you can see them elsewhere?

There are many alternatives to discussion available. Podcasts are extremely popular as well. Like videos, they seem more like lectures, more like having someone prepare your food for you (nothing wrong with that). Discussion is different, imo, for the reasons I've already mentioned. I'm not against including something that will reduce my own ignorance, but I don't like the arguments for allowing videos so far.

It's like we have this sailing club that most get a LOT of enjoyment out of, but the popularity of jet skis and their shared connection to water is being proposed as a reason to allow them access to our harbor. Does that make sense? 

 

[Moontanman]

I think I agree with both of you on the basics, simply posting a video would not be productive, but posting a video about what you want to discuss and quoting from the video and listing the time stamp for what you want to discuss is possibly a better idea but videos are problematic for many reasons and quite good for many as well. 

The wave of "fake science news" broke a while back and you tube did some demonetizing that helped and hurt the situation but as we fight the tsunami of fake news media the format of your tube videos is spreading bullshit faster than a mechanical field fertiliser. 

Reading is a wonderful format for fiction and draws in far more readers than science and yet fiction is in danger of being usurped by videos and CGI technology. As an avid reader i used to criticize the way books were often distorted when transferred the the medium of TV and movies but not so few actually read that movies made from books are not questioned at all and books we were all sure could never be made into movies will be if they are popular enough to or if the movie makers stop just repeating the same material over and over and they realise the depth of the material that could be made using books that before now simply couldn't be made into movies. 

The movie Avatar came damn close to rivaling what I see when I read a good book, can science compet as the medium becomes the message? Do we need video science? people like Bill Nye and his influence, mainly know for the video medium, was and is much bigger than it would have been with out video... 

[Moontanman]

It occurs to me that we have a category where we can post anything we want as what we are listening to now... just saying...  

[Prometheus]

Just found this channel and had to share:

 

[Moontanman]

1 hour ago, Prometheus said:

Just found this channel and had to share:

 

I love it, the micro cosmos is, IMHO, a source of information of how complex life advanced to us. Protests were the first step towards us!