5 ms·

She seems to be after some hidden truth that "scientists" are not telling us. I’d be more appreciative of her insights if those were not implying we’ve been lie

She seems to be after some hidden truth that "scientists" are not telling us. I’d be more appreciative of her insights if those were not implying we’ve been lied to. She should consider that 1. Being wrong is ok, doesn’t mean someone’s lying. 2. Maybe she is wrong. 3. Interpretations of quantum mechanics are fun and there’s nothing to be angry at. So I’m a bit skeptical about her skepticism, it doesn’t sound constructive to me.

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
I read the article. I've read other articles of hers as well. And I don't read her that way at all. What she primarily is, is someone who insists on experimental data as an anchor for physical theories. She's not totally against theory that isn't backed by experiment (despite her last paragraph or two), but given multiple competing theories that cannot be experimentally verified, she is unwilling to accept any one of them as "the truth". I don't think she's wrong in that.
- qsdf38100 4y ago
  Sorry I didn’t read the article. I plaid guilty. I have this feeling because of how she comes across on YouTube content, which might not be representative of her work.
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    Well, the article was the transcript of one of her YouTube posts. But the article doesn't tell me tone of voice, facial expression, and the like. So... maybe I have to say "Sorry, I didn't watch her on YouTube."
lumost 4y ago
She makes very specific points on what can and can’t be reasonably treated as a scientific problem. Her main concern appears to be that much physics research and funding has deviated towards mathematical philosophy. Work which may be correct, but is untestable and ultimately unscientific.
tambourine_man 4y ago
The tone is off putting for me as well. It comes across as arrogant mixed with what I'll call a “Youtube language”: the TRUTH about X, what they don't wan't YOU to KNOW, along with excessively expressive thumbnail. This “Youtube language” is something a lot of content creators suffer from, unfortunately.
- Sebb767 4y ago
  I hate those titels, too, but let's be honest: They're a necessary sharade. If you want to earn any money from YouTube or even just get views, you need to please the algorithm. Sure, you can work without them, but it's like driving with the handbrake pulled. The content of the videos is what matters. The advertising is annoying, but necessary.
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    >you need to please the algorithm Don't blame the algorithm. Blame people themselves. It's not YouTube's fault that people find those kinds of titles more interesting.
    - strbean 4y ago
      Google put huge amounts of effort into punishing the search rankings of sites that attempted to manipulate their ranking in shady ways. YouTube could put in some amount of effort towards the same end. Of course, that would probably reduce engagement...
      - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
        > Google put huge amounts of effort into punishing the search rankings of sites that attempted to manipulate their ranking in shady ways. From the search results I get, it appears that they abandoned that effort long ago.
      - hiptobecubic 4y ago
        "Making people want to click the video" is not shady in the same sense as SEO. A comparable trick might be jamming a bunch of keywords into the description. Your real complaint is that people like stupid videos, but that's not YouTube's problem or fault.
zarzavat 4y ago
Re point 2: she made a video on neural networks that I think many people here will be able to appreciate. https://youtu.be/fxiHM11w-rk https://youtu.be/fxiHM11w-rk (about 2 minutes in)
johnny22 4y ago

AnimalMuppet 4y ago

I read the article. I've read other articles of hers as well. And I don't read her that way at all. What she primarily is, is someone who insists on experimental data as an anchor for physical theories. She's not totally against theory that isn't backed by experiment (despite her last paragraph or two), but given multiple competing theories that cannot be experimentally verified, she is unwilling to accept any one of them as "the truth". I don't think she's wrong in that.

qsdf38100 4y ago
Sorry I didn’t read the article. I plaid guilty. I have this feeling because of how she comes across on YouTube content, which might not be representative of her work.
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Well, the article was the transcript of one of her YouTube posts. But the article doesn't tell me tone of voice, facial expression, and the like. So... maybe I have to say "Sorry, I didn't watch her on YouTube."

lumost 4y ago

She makes very specific points on what can and can’t be reasonably treated as a scientific problem. Her main concern appears to be that much physics research and funding has deviated towards mathematical philosophy. Work which may be correct, but is untestable and ultimately unscientific.

tambourine_man 4y ago

The tone is off putting for me as well. It comes across as arrogant mixed with what I'll call a “Youtube language”: the TRUTH about X, what they don't wan't YOU to KNOW, along with excessively expressive thumbnail. This “Youtube language” is something a lot of content creators suffer from, unfortunately.

Sebb767 4y ago
I hate those titels, too, but let's be honest: They're a necessary sharade. If you want to earn any money from YouTube or even just get views, you need to please the algorithm. Sure, you can work without them, but it's like driving with the handbrake pulled. The content of the videos is what matters. The advertising is annoying, but necessary.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  >you need to please the algorithm Don't blame the algorithm. Blame people themselves. It's not YouTube's fault that people find those kinds of titles more interesting.
  - strbean 4y ago
    Google put huge amounts of effort into punishing the search rankings of sites that attempted to manipulate their ranking in shady ways. YouTube could put in some amount of effort towards the same end. Of course, that would probably reduce engagement...
    - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
      > Google put huge amounts of effort into punishing the search rankings of sites that attempted to manipulate their ranking in shady ways. From the search results I get, it appears that they abandoned that effort long ago.
    - hiptobecubic 4y ago
      "Making people want to click the video" is not shady in the same sense as SEO. A comparable trick might be jamming a bunch of keywords into the description. Your real complaint is that people like stupid videos, but that's not YouTube's problem or fault.

zarzavat 4y ago

Re point 2: she made a video on neural networks that I think many people here will be able to appreciate. https://youtu.be/fxiHM11w-rk https://youtu.be/fxiHM11w-rk (about 2 minutes in)

johnny22 4y ago