5 ms·

You're comparing a 46 minute presentation with single 5 minute slice of a 160 minute course? (I have watched that concurrency pycon session previously - it is

by w0m 5y ago

You're comparing a 46 minute presentation with single 5 minute slice of a 160 minute course? (I have watched that concurrency pycon session previously - it is good.)

mjburgess 5y ago
Yes, I am. I am rejecting the premise that videos should be 5min. That 10min on traits and a 5min "demo" in this style is actually a productive form of learning. If you can only do 160 min, do a 160 min journey. Consider any of the 3hr tutorial videos done at pycon. 10 min on traits, within that 160min, I think would be very productive. EDIT: from elsewhere in this thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnWGO-tLtLA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnWGO-tLtLA -- c. 3hrs on rust (I havent seen it, but I suspect that it is approached as a journey, will improve its quality).
- BHSPitMonkey 5y ago
  You can watch as many sequenced 5 minute videos as you wish in a single sitting; The fact that they're divided into separate videos in a playlist is hardly different than taking a longer video and marking the timestamps where different ideas are presented.
  - setr 5y ago
    That’s technically true, but it’s obviously not true in practice — a 5-min video system means that everything will be self-contained within those 5 minutes. TV is the clearest counter-example (though it has additional constraints, like week-long gaps) — you need an ending at each 30 minutes, because you don’t expect the viewer to watch 4 episodes in one sitting. And this obviously isn’t the same as 2 hrs in a movie, where they expect the viewer to sit through the whole thing continuously. Even on Netflix, where they do expect you to binge watch, they still have to uphold the ending-per-episode constraint, because they’ve told the viewer this is a natural stopping point, by virtue of the format
    - w0m 5y ago
      People are talking out both sides here. Complaining that the 5 minute demo isn't giving enough context; but also saying that you can't get deep enough in 5 minutes because the 5 minute video has to rehash to add context. I get it; some people dislike short videos; but there's also a fare bit of straw man building going on at the same time, starting at the dislike and trying to justify it. Luckily we have lots of options :)
- AlexCoventry 5y ago
  I think there's a place for both types of presentation. Strang is giving a conceptual overview, and a listener is necessarily passive. The MS videos are presenting technical details of how to write rust programs, and bite-sized chunks can be good there, because they provide natural stopping points for listeners to experiment with the presented methods. Similarly, I could see bite-sized videos being natural for teaching the business of actually calculating solutions to a system of linear equations.

by w0m 5y ago

You're comparing a 46 minute presentation with single 5 minute slice of a 160 minute course? (I have watched that concurrency pycon session previously - it is good.)

mjburgess 5y ago

Yes, I am. I am rejecting the premise that videos should be 5min. That 10min on traits and a 5min "demo" in this style is actually a productive form of learning. If you can only do 160 min, do a 160 min journey. Consider any of the 3hr tutorial videos done at pycon. 10 min on traits, within that 160min, I think would be very productive. EDIT: from elsewhere in this thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnWGO-tLtLA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnWGO-tLtLA -- c. 3hrs on rust (I havent seen it, but I suspect that it is approached as a journey, will improve its quality).

BHSPitMonkey 5y ago
You can watch as many sequenced 5 minute videos as you wish in a single sitting; The fact that they're divided into separate videos in a playlist is hardly different than taking a longer video and marking the timestamps where different ideas are presented.
- setr 5y ago
  That’s technically true, but it’s obviously not true in practice — a 5-min video system means that everything will be self-contained within those 5 minutes. TV is the clearest counter-example (though it has additional constraints, like week-long gaps) — you need an ending at each 30 minutes, because you don’t expect the viewer to watch 4 episodes in one sitting. And this obviously isn’t the same as 2 hrs in a movie, where they expect the viewer to sit through the whole thing continuously. Even on Netflix, where they do expect you to binge watch, they still have to uphold the ending-per-episode constraint, because they’ve told the viewer this is a natural stopping point, by virtue of the format
  - w0m 5y ago
    People are talking out both sides here. Complaining that the 5 minute demo isn't giving enough context; but also saying that you can't get deep enough in 5 minutes because the 5 minute video has to rehash to add context. I get it; some people dislike short videos; but there's also a fare bit of straw man building going on at the same time, starting at the dislike and trying to justify it. Luckily we have lots of options :)
AlexCoventry 5y ago
I think there's a place for both types of presentation. Strang is giving a conceptual overview, and a listener is necessarily passive. The MS videos are presenting technical details of how to write rust programs, and bite-sized chunks can be good there, because they provide natural stopping points for listeners to experiment with the presented methods. Similarly, I could see bite-sized videos being natural for teaching the business of actually calculating solutions to a system of linear equations.