• Soup@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    This shit happens far too often. Between the YouTube links that “prove” their bullshit, to the thousand-word copypasta essay that doesn’t contain a single original thought.

    Yeah. I’m not doing that.

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is my reaction anytime I Google virtually anything. Stop fucking recommending videos, Google. We’re not fucking interested.

    • Tja@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      You are not fucking interested. We, as Google’s customer base, want everything in video format because we are allergic to reading. If it pisses off 1% of users (which is ten of millions of people), so be it, still profit.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        If only there were a way to search specifically for videos. That would be convenient.

    • vithigar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m with you. This shift over the last decade or so to everything being in video essay format is infuriating. Especially when I’m trying to look up instructions for something that could just be a five item bulleted list or a single image but instead is stretched out into a ten minute video.

      There have actually been a few times I’ve given up on finding some piece of information or instructions I wanted because I could only find video sources.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        There are also the SEO sites, you search for how to write a file in python and you get 20 pages about file writing and why that is used, the history of python and more until you, maybe, get the simple one liner you forgot about.

        And I use an ad blocker.

        I know it’s so google thinks I’m enjoying myself on that site because I stay there “longer”, and thus thinks it’s a good site, but would it be so hard to have a search engine just straight out exclude large sites? I mean it does clearly not work well.

        Fuck, exclude all “dynamic” ones too. Back to pure html! 😺

        • eatthecake@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          I use a firefox extension called uBlacklist. It blocks any site you hate from appearing in google search results. No more facebook, instagram, youtube, tiktok etc.

  • kaffiene@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    Oh hell yes! I also feel that people who can’t summarise their argument likely don’t understand it

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Amen. That’s often what I say to them: if you can’t describe the argument you didn’t understand it.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    A reference should contain a timestamp or a page number. That’s always been the standard for citations. You don’t just reference a book.

    Also, whatever claim from the original material supports your argument should be quoted or paraphrased by you in your argument.

    Citations aren’t the same as bibliography. A citation is just in case a person doesn’t trust your claim that “A said X”; they can follow your citation to check if that’s true.

    Bibliography is further reading, if a person wants to know more about what you’re saying.

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Been there. Skimmed four fucking Youtube links. Reported back to explain in detail why the other guy was wrong about all of them. Didn’t work.

    This is why enforced civility is a failure of moderation. People need the ability to say, “fuck off.” Not just “I strongly disagree and question your motives and blah blah blah.” We must be able to communicate: this is stupid, you’re being an asshole, polite consideration would be lending undue legitimacy.

    Otherwise any stupid asshole can blather on about whatever and demand to be treated like they have a point. Mods who don’t remove those people pre-emptively don’t understand their role. Mods who actively protect those people are bastards.

  • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    me when people say i’m not allowed to exist in a leftist space unless i’ve read all of these five books on theory cover to cover

    • Juice@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      As someone who has read those 5 books, and the next 5, and the next 5 and so on, those people never go away. There’s always 5 more books. I still recommend those books but in my experience they’re almost always in-group signalling and not coming up with a new synthesis of the material as understood through their own unique experiences as a worker. Actually those people will be the first to tell you that experience doesn’t matter its actually their experience reading books that matters. If you haven’t read them and agree, then that’s fine; if you have read them and disagree then you haven’t read them good enough, or read these other books for the appropriate context.

      “The traditions of dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the minds of the living.” is as true for the left as it is any other tradition.