Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Phys Org2)   This is why you're reading the Geek tab, not watching it   (phys.org) divider line
    More: Obvious, Japan, Coral reef, Audience, Japanese yen, Dr. Takano Kohei of NECRI, Coral, potential respondents, Audience theory  
•       •       •

1208 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 26 Aug 2020 at 11:20 AM (21 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



20 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-08-26 10:49:31 AM  
TL;DR
 
2020-08-26 11:31:48 AM  
"Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?
 
2020-08-26 11:35:08 AM  
I find video is intolerably inefficient at delivering information. If I want news or am trying to learn something, I don't even give it a try any more. Only text is worth my attention.

For delivering emotion, video works pretty well. So advertising and story-telling are probably always going to make good use of it.
 
2020-08-26 11:35:54 AM  
In my experience, video is not as effective as text for lots of things.  Ditto podcasts & radio.

I can read faster than other people can talk.  And I can go back a paragraph with my eyes much easier than hitting a rewind button.  Text is much more random-access than video is.
 
2020-08-26 11:38:31 AM  

FrancoFile: In my experience, video is not as effective as text for lots of things.  Ditto podcasts & radio.

I can read faster than other people can talk.  And I can go back a paragraph with my eyes much easier than hitting a rewind button.  Text is much more random-access than video is.


Production value and simply knowing how to teach makes all the difference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spUNp​y​F58BY
 
2020-08-26 11:43:11 AM  
I find the "How the Universe Works" and "The Planets' series to be very informative. Video aids when learning about singularities, expansion of the universe, distances between things was all very helpful. Reading how far the planets are from each other doesn't tell the story as well as someone driving in a car away from a small light source representing the sun. (I think that has to do with how our brains don't handle orders of magnitude very well)

This is a good side scroller showing the solar system to scale for a smart phone if anyone hasn't seen it
https://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/​p​ixelspace_solarsystem.html
 
2020-08-26 12:00:47 PM  
Wow like  my mind is blown man.

Who'd a thought that in a poly-POV world, a mono-POV delivery of ideas and informaiton wasn't going to be universally reliable?
 
2020-08-26 12:35:39 PM  

Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?


Donating to conservation efforts is hardly what I'd call "charity."

I usually always skip video that's presented instead of an article, it's not practical half of the time, and you can't scroll past the filler as well.
 
2020-08-26 12:37:15 PM  

lindalouwho: Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?

Donating to conservation efforts is hardly what I'd call "charity."

I usually always skip video that's presented instead of an article, it's not practical half of the time, and you can't scroll past the filler as well.


Donating is a damn close to being a farking synonym of charity.
 
2020-08-26 12:40:34 PM  

Russ1642: lindalouwho: Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?

Donating to conservation efforts is hardly what I'd call "charity."

I usually always skip video that's presented instead of an article, it's not practical half of the time, and you can't scroll past the filler as well.

Donating is a damn close to being a farking synonym of charity.


Some people see conservation as a responsibility.
 
2020-08-26 12:41:56 PM  

OccamsWhiskers: I find video is intolerably inefficient at delivering information. If I want news or am trying to learn something, I don't even give it a try any more. Only text is worth my attention.

For delivering emotion, video works pretty well. So advertising and story-telling are probably always going to make good use of it.


Yay!  I'm not the only one!

I farking _hate_ "argument by youtube link", as some of my friends like to use.  If you have a point to make, make it with your words, or send me a decent article.  It doesn't help any that so much of YT has absolutely garbage production quality, too.

Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?


Communication includes getting your point across to people who need to hear it, who may not be in your specific community, or share your values, or have an equal understanding of details.  Why is this a "WTF?"  "Science says this is a problem, and this is why you, non-scientist, should care and try to help" is maybe the _most_ important kind of science communication, eh?

Hell, if our dimwitted, anti-science "leadership" hadn't failed catastrophically at that in Feb/March, there'd be 180,000+ Americans still alive, and we wouldn't be looking at that number knowing that the tally is _still_getting_started_.
 
2020-08-26 12:43:09 PM  
Kids these days search for videos to learn information, yet videos are a horrible way to learn. A few well written paragraphs can be better then a 15 min rambling video
 
2020-08-26 12:50:44 PM  
Video can be helpful after you've read the article and the references with a pencil.
 
2020-08-26 12:59:02 PM  

SFSailor: OccamsWhiskers: I find video is intolerably inefficient at delivering information. If I want news or am trying to learn something, I don't even give it a try any more. Only text is worth my attention.

For delivering emotion, video works pretty well. So advertising and story-telling are probably always going to make good use of it.

Yay!  I'm not the only one!

I farking _hate_ "argument by youtube link", as some of my friends like to use.  If you have a point to make, make it with your words, or send me a decent article.  It doesn't help any that so much of YT has absolutely garbage production quality, too.

Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?

Communication includes getting your point across to people who need to hear it, who may not be in your specific community, or share your values, or have an equal understanding of details.  Why is this a "WTF?"  "Science says this is a problem, and this is why you, non-scientist, should care and try to help" is maybe the _most_ important kind of science communication, eh?

Hell, if our dimwitted, anti-science "leadership" hadn't failed catastrophically at that in Feb/March, there'd be 180,000+ Americans still alive, and we wouldn't be looking at that number knowing that the tally is _still_getting_started_.


I'm sure that's a noble cause but it isn't how you measure the success of science education.
 
2020-08-26 1:05:45 PM  

FrancoFile: In my experience, video is not as effective as text for lots of things.  Ditto podcasts & radio.

I can read faster than other people can talk.  And I can go back a paragraph with my eyes much easier than hitting a rewind button.  Text is much more random-access than video is.


Amen.  To me watching videos/listening to people go on is approximately like l

i

s
ten
i

n
g...
to someone that talks that slowly.  It's mind-hurtingly irritating when I actually need to access information.  Got something that requires an ongoing visual element?  Sure, video is great.  Just presenting info?  Shut yer yap and get to typing.
 
2020-08-26 1:07:18 PM  

Russ1642: Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?

Communication includes getting your point across to people who need to hear it, who may not be in your specific community, or share your values, or have an equal understanding of details.  Why is this a "WTF?"  "Science says this is a problem, and this is why you, non-scientist, should care and try to help" is maybe the _most_ important kind of science communication, eh?

Hell, if our dimwitted, anti-science "leadership" hadn't failed catastrophically at that in Feb/March, there'd be 180,000+ Americans still alive, and we wouldn't be looking at that number knowing that the tally is _still_getting_started_.

I'm sure that's a noble cause but it isn't how you measure the success of science education.


You've either moved the goalposts, or have an unnecessarily, counterproductively, even obtusely, narrow definition of "science communication."
 
2020-08-26 1:12:32 PM  

SFSailor: Russ1642: Russ1642: "Science communication" apparently means getting people to donate to charity. WTF?

Communication includes getting your point across to people who need to hear it, who may not be in your specific community, or share your values, or have an equal understanding of details.  Why is this a "WTF?"  "Science says this is a problem, and this is why you, non-scientist, should care and try to help" is maybe the _most_ important kind of science communication, eh?

Hell, if our dimwitted, anti-science "leadership" hadn't failed catastrophically at that in Feb/March, there'd be 180,000+ Americans still alive, and we wouldn't be looking at that number knowing that the tally is _still_getting_started_.

I'm sure that's a noble cause but it isn't how you measure the success of science education.

You've either moved the goalposts, or have an unnecessarily, counterproductively, even obtusely, narrow definition of "science communication."


Right, communication. My point is the same. You don't measure the success of science communication by seeing how people donate to farking charity. It's a ridiculous conclusion.
 
2020-08-26 1:16:00 PM  

Russ1642: FrancoFile: In my experience, video is not as effective as text for lots of things.  Ditto podcasts & radio.

I can read faster than other people can talk.  And I can go back a paragraph with my eyes much easier than hitting a rewind button.  Text is much more random-access than video is.

Production value and simply knowing how to teach makes all the difference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spUNpy​F58BY



I love 3Blue1Brown; he always has very interesting stuff. As does Veritasium and PBS Space Time. As you said, production values and most importantly knowing how to teach make all the difference.

This equation will change how you see the world (the logistic map)
Youtube ovJcsL7vyrk


Of course, I enjoy reading and most of my information is garnered that way, but a good visualization should not be discounted out of hand either. And a good video can give you an overview that makes you want to read about a topic in depth.
 
2020-08-26 3:57:33 PM  

OccamsWhiskers: I find video is intolerably inefficient at delivering information. If I want news or am trying to learn something, I don't even give it a try any more. Only text is worth my attention.

For delivering emotion, video works pretty well. So advertising and story-telling are probably always going to make good use of it.


video is good for art, movies, etc   (the right spatial brain)  but for learning details/data/logic/ etc, i need literal left brain text.

i can read in 5 minutes what it takes a youtuber 15 or 20 mintues to tell me about.  very inefficient.
 
2020-08-26 3:58:30 PM  

Some Junkie Cosmonaut: FrancoFile: In my experience, video is not as effective as text for lots of things.  Ditto podcasts & radio.

I can read faster than other people can talk.  And I can go back a paragraph with my eyes much easier than hitting a rewind button.  Text is much more random-access than video is.

Amen.  To me watching videos/listening to people go on is approximately like l

i

s
ten
i

n
g...
to someone that talks that slowly.  It's mind-hurtingly irritating when I actually need to access information.  Got something that requires an ongoing visual element?  Sure, video is great.  Just presenting info?  Shut yer yap and get to typing.


i


know


what


u


......................................​......................................​......................................​..mean.
 
Displayed 20 of 20 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.