What if we can't trust *ANY* software...even if you have the source code?A perfect, self-replicating "sin" passed down for generations of compilers. Invisib...
Yeah I will literally never watch any of these subscription/sponsor-begging “youtubers”. All of the videos of this kind should just be text. Keep your goofy over-the-top facial expressions and quirky delivery to yourself, please.
The good news is that they’ve never had an original thought in their life and these videos do already exist as articles, which they’ve stolen and repackaged into video form.
Dude, people are still asking wtf functors, monoidd, monads, and other such things are and there are papers written about those things all the time. Why is it so hard to accept that not everybody can stay awake while reading a scientific article? Are you just unwilling to accept that videos are easier to consume?
Some people cannot understand what such scientific articles are saying because of how they were written and for which audience. Are you unaware that visual aids and animations exist? Do you think describing something is always better than showing it?
There is a reason the expression “a picture can say more than a thousand words”.
Yes, there are some videos that are just somebody reading an article to you with no added content, but I feel like this argument is brought jp regardless of video. Providing a DOI:// link just makes me shake my head.
Videos that should have been articles?
At least someone is making informative content in an accessible format without trying to get me to buy whatever is the brand of the month.
I’d much rather watch that than the videos that should have been a paragraph.
Plain text is significantly more accessible.
https://youtubetotranscript.com/transcript?v=Fu3laL5VYdM
?
Had it been a Computerphile video, would you have said the same ?
Depends. Is it an article, or is it a video?
Yeah I will literally never watch any of these subscription/sponsor-begging “youtubers”. All of the videos of this kind should just be text. Keep your goofy over-the-top facial expressions and quirky delivery to yourself, please.
The good news is that they’ve never had an original thought in their life and these videos do already exist as articles, which they’ve stolen and repackaged into video form.
Here is the original content for this video: https://doi.org/10.1145%2F358198.358210
Dude, people are still asking wtf functors, monoidd, monads, and other such things are and there are papers written about those things all the time. Why is it so hard to accept that not everybody can stay awake while reading a scientific article? Are you just unwilling to accept that videos are easier to consume?
Some people cannot understand what such scientific articles are saying because of how they were written and for which audience. Are you unaware that visual aids and animations exist? Do you think describing something is always better than showing it? There is a reason the expression “a picture can say more than a thousand words”.
Yes, there are some videos that are just somebody reading an article to you with no added content, but I feel like this argument is brought jp regardless of video. Providing a DOI:// link just makes me shake my head.