This seems to mostly exonerate kurz of anything unforgivable. I think coffee break will regret not handling this privately before releasing the video. It does seem pretty clear that kurz stalled...
This seems to mostly exonerate kurz of anything unforgivable. I think coffee break will regret not handling this privately before releasing the video.
It does seem pretty clear that kurz stalled coffee. The void from feb 8 to feb 21 while he was traveling and recovering is telling. He released a video, so obviously he was working during that time. He offered the first chance at an interview days before his own video dropped. Coffee messed up by not responding sooner and not confronting him privately about all of these issues. I don't think he'll be gaining fans from this really, though it sucks for him that basiya whole video idea was trashed.
Well certainly. I just thought that the context would be helpful for others looking at the link. Then again, most people from Tildes were already on Reddit, so I'm not entirely sure who I am helping.
Well certainly. I just thought that the context would be helpful for others looking at the link.
Then again, most people from Tildes were already on Reddit, so I'm not entirely sure who I am helping.
here's the emails between Coffee Break and Kurzgesagt for those curious. Evidently, Coffee Break never actually responded to Kurzgesagt's email about when he could do an interview, and the...
here's the emails between Coffee Break and Kurzgesagt for those curious. Evidently, Coffee Break never actually responded to Kurzgesagt's email about when he could do an interview, and the statement that he called the video "good enough" is not only a paraphrase, which Coffee Break admits, but seems to be a somewhat misrepresentive one.
Kurzgesagt is pretty bad science vulgarization, unless you are 12 yo. Personally I recommend the Numberphile's related channels (Sixty Symbols, Computerphile , ...). The PBS ones are good to (PBS...
Kurzgesagt is pretty bad science vulgarization, unless you are 12 yo. Personally I recommend the Numberphile's related channels (Sixty Symbols, Computerphile , ...). The PBS ones are good to (PBS Space Time). I don't know if there's good equivalents for biology and social sciences.
They are bad because they are bad. Take for example their video on Big Bang, "The Beginning of Everything -- The Big Bang". The title and the first sentences are already plain wrong and...
They are bad because they are bad. Take for example their video on Big Bang, "The Beginning of Everything -- The Big Bang". The title and the first sentences are already plain wrong and misleading. Which they would have known if they read the wikipedia page about the big bang. It's specially bad because that's a Christian apologetic's talking point, so in addition to being bad at science they are also bad at politics.
A good 5 minutes video on the subject could for example explain the Hubble measurements. It's not complicated, fascinating and at the end people would have learned something.
The subjects are also bad, they focus on sensational, sci-fi related, or very speculative subjects (e.g. Wormholes) instead of important things. The problem with that is that people miss the actually captivating science we have.
I think it's similar to how things like physics and chemistry are taught in high schools: not always technically correct but simplified a bit, so it's a little easier to understand. When you do...
I think it's similar to how things like physics and chemistry are taught in high schools: not always technically correct but simplified a bit, so it's a little easier to understand. When you do get to actually studying those fields you'll learn it the correct way. What Kurz does is mostly just making people interested in sciences with easy-to-digest and fun videos. I think raising interest for science is a pretty important thing.
I can't speak for @Staross, but from the few Kurzgesagt videos I've seen have been off in a way I can't quite describe. I find it difficult to get meaningful information from their videos. It's...
I can't speak for @Staross, but from the few Kurzgesagt videos I've seen have been off in a way I can't quite describe. I find it difficult to get meaningful information from their videos. It's largely because the animation is distracting and the even tone the narrator speaks in makes it difficult to tell which words are important.
I have also noticed that they sometimes use scientific findings to support their narrative, but are actually part of a much more complicated argument. Their video on meat is a perfect example. One of the more specific arguments they use is how livestock requires much more water than plants. But that isn't an argument to stop eating meat - it's an argument to stop producing meat in areas with local freshwater shortages. Water used by livestock doesn't just disappear, it gets recycled. They later state the world could feed billions more people if we stopped producing meat, but that's not even a real argument. We already produce more than enough food to feed the world - the problem is that we aren't 100% good at ensuring everyone has access to it.
I just re-watched their "trust" video and it looks like they actually doubled-down on the meat video. The ones they removed were the ones on refugees and addiction. It's actually funny; they say...
I just re-watched their "trust" video and it looks like they actually doubled-down on the meat video. The ones they removed were the ones on refugees and addiction.
It's actually funny; they say one of the reasons why their refugee video was bad was because it was "divisive and emotional", but that applies just as well with their meat video!
Perhaps doubling down was too strong a phrase, but they (very quickly, as part of a list) did say that they are sticking behind it's conclusion. It's funny you mention sources, because after...
Perhaps doubling down was too strong a phrase, but they (very quickly, as part of a list) did say that they are sticking behind it's conclusion.
It's funny you mention sources, because after re-watching this video I checked the sources for the meat video. About a quarter of the sources (not including the extra reading section) were from animal rights organizations. I would consider those sources to be biased. The section of the video using these sources loses any sense of impartiality because they begin to argue for a specific moral viewpoint. And that's a shame, because when combined with the misleading information it really undermines the legitimate reasons why one should limit their meat consumption!
I will stand behind my view that the meat video doesn't meet the standards they are claiming in their trust video. Here's the reason why, in a quote from said video:
In both of [the videos we took down], we didn't try to present a balanced perspective, but instead chose a take and ran with it.
And in regards to their Addiction video specifically:
Addiction is far from solved, and our videos should have reflected that, instead of taking one side. We simplified an idea so much, that it made a great story, but became distorting.
(Forgive the comma splices; they were in the subtitles).
I suppose I would agree with that. Though it is more problematic knowing that most people won't go any further than watching the video. This particular video is really the only one I have major...
I suppose I would agree with that. Though it is more problematic knowing that most people won't go any further than watching the video. This particular video is really the only one I have major problems with.
I watched some of them. Requires critical listening, tends to oversimplfy. But the channel is honest with that and does not use a "tone" that implies dogmatic truth (which is why I never watched...
I watched some of them. Requires critical listening, tends to oversimplfy. But the channel is honest with that and does not use a "tone" that implies dogmatic truth (which is why I never watched any videos from Kurzgesagt).
I'd say the CC videos are good intros to their relative topics. Literature series could have done better if it was not mostly US and almost entirely English language works. Mythology sometimes looks at the myths with morals of today, which is a problem too.
I've always enjoyed The Thought Emporium for biology-related content. The videos are very "how to do x" and DIY-oriented, but nonetheless very interesting. I should add it's not 100% biology but...
I've always enjoyed The Thought Emporium for biology-related content. The videos are very "how to do x" and DIY-oriented, but nonetheless very interesting.
I should add it's not 100% biology but also chemistry, immunolog, electrics and physics subjects.
To me it feels like Coffee Break wanted to make a "Kurzgesagt EXPOSED" video and KG then published their own video on the issue of trust before CB was able to, likely to avoid a shitstorm in their...
To me it feels like Coffee Break wanted to make a "Kurzgesagt EXPOSED" video and KG then published their own video on the issue of trust before CB was able to, likely to avoid a shitstorm in their direction that can't be tamed by facts. I don't really get the issues that CB raises in the video...
Atleast the german channel is funded by public broadcast, which usually means there are strings attached and scientific content needs to be confidently accurate. That probably also covers the english-only videos since 2017, but I'm not sure on that.
So this is a pretty interesting video by Coffee Break. Who is claiming that a video by Kurzgesagt was produced solely to preemptively address criticisms brought up by Coffee Break. This is...
So this is a pretty interesting video by Coffee Break. Who is claiming that a video by Kurzgesagt was produced solely to preemptively address criticisms brought up by Coffee Break. This is somewhat significant because it paints Kurzgesagt as the opposite of being honest and transparent about the reason for the video. However other youtuber's such as CGP Grey have said Kurzgesagt's video was in the works for much longer. In my opinion, the truth is probably in the middle. Kurzgesagt probably wanted to address some of their videos and make them better, but they're also very sensitive to outside criticism and took an opportunity to avoid it.
The "small youtuber's stolen idea" argument kind of falls flat for me, it's about their channel after all, although I can see how it leaves a bit of a poor taste, Phillip should have told him....
The "small youtuber's stolen idea" argument kind of falls flat for me, it's about their channel after all, although I can see how it leaves a bit of a poor taste, Phillip should have told him.
Anyway, if you treat pop-science Youtube videos as a single source of truth, I think you should consider holding yourself to higher research standards. It's like reading the first paragraph of a wiki page and claiming that you've grasped a complex subject. It's can be a nice introduction, sure, but always do your reading.
Here is an AMA in response to this, by the founder of Kurzgesagt.
This seems to mostly exonerate kurz of anything unforgivable. I think coffee break will regret not handling this privately before releasing the video.
It does seem pretty clear that kurz stalled coffee. The void from feb 8 to feb 21 while he was traveling and recovering is telling. He released a video, so obviously he was working during that time. He offered the first chance at an interview days before his own video dropped. Coffee messed up by not responding sooner and not confronting him privately about all of these issues. I don't think he'll be gaining fans from this really, though it sucks for him that basiya whole video idea was trashed.
Given it's in their subreddit, it's probably not the best source for unbiased opinion.
Forget the commentary, but there's primary source information coming straight from kurz. Can't really discard that.
Well certainly. I just thought that the context would be helpful for others looking at the link.
Then again, most people from Tildes were already on Reddit, so I'm not entirely sure who I am helping.
here's the emails between Coffee Break and Kurzgesagt for those curious. Evidently, Coffee Break never actually responded to Kurzgesagt's email about when he could do an interview, and the statement that he called the video "good enough" is not only a paraphrase, which Coffee Break admits, but seems to be a somewhat misrepresentive one.
Kurzgesagt is pretty bad science vulgarization, unless you are 12 yo. Personally I recommend the Numberphile's related channels (Sixty Symbols, Computerphile , ...). The PBS ones are good to (PBS Space Time). I don't know if there's good equivalents for biology and social sciences.
They are bad because they are bad. Take for example their video on Big Bang, "The Beginning of Everything -- The Big Bang". The title and the first sentences are already plain wrong and misleading. Which they would have known if they read the wikipedia page about the big bang. It's specially bad because that's a Christian apologetic's talking point, so in addition to being bad at science they are also bad at politics.
A good 5 minutes video on the subject could for example explain the Hubble measurements. It's not complicated, fascinating and at the end people would have learned something.
The subjects are also bad, they focus on sensational, sci-fi related, or very speculative subjects (e.g. Wormholes) instead of important things. The problem with that is that people miss the actually captivating science we have.
I think it's similar to how things like physics and chemistry are taught in high schools: not always technically correct but simplified a bit, so it's a little easier to understand. When you do get to actually studying those fields you'll learn it the correct way. What Kurz does is mostly just making people interested in sciences with easy-to-digest and fun videos. I think raising interest for science is a pretty important thing.
I can't speak for @Staross, but from the few Kurzgesagt videos I've seen have been off in a way I can't quite describe. I find it difficult to get meaningful information from their videos. It's largely because the animation is distracting and the even tone the narrator speaks in makes it difficult to tell which words are important.
I have also noticed that they sometimes use scientific findings to support their narrative, but are actually part of a much more complicated argument. Their video on meat is a perfect example. One of the more specific arguments they use is how livestock requires much more water than plants. But that isn't an argument to stop eating meat - it's an argument to stop producing meat in areas with local freshwater shortages. Water used by livestock doesn't just disappear, it gets recycled. They later state the world could feed billions more people if we stopped producing meat, but that's not even a real argument. We already produce more than enough food to feed the world - the problem is that we aren't 100% good at ensuring everyone has access to it.
I just re-watched their "trust" video and it looks like they actually doubled-down on the meat video. The ones they removed were the ones on refugees and addiction.
It's actually funny; they say one of the reasons why their refugee video was bad was because it was "divisive and emotional", but that applies just as well with their meat video!
Perhaps doubling down was too strong a phrase, but they (very quickly, as part of a list) did say that they are sticking behind it's conclusion.
It's funny you mention sources, because after re-watching this video I checked the sources for the meat video. About a quarter of the sources (not including the extra reading section) were from animal rights organizations. I would consider those sources to be biased. The section of the video using these sources loses any sense of impartiality because they begin to argue for a specific moral viewpoint. And that's a shame, because when combined with the misleading information it really undermines the legitimate reasons why one should limit their meat consumption!
I will stand behind my view that the meat video doesn't meet the standards they are claiming in their trust video. Here's the reason why, in a quote from said video:
And in regards to their Addiction video specifically:
(Forgive the comma splices; they were in the subtitles).
I suppose I would agree with that. Though it is more problematic knowing that most people won't go any further than watching the video. This particular video is really the only one I have major problems with.
Possibly the Crash Course videos?
https://www.youtube.com/user/crashcourse
I watched some of them. Requires critical listening, tends to oversimplfy. But the channel is honest with that and does not use a "tone" that implies dogmatic truth (which is why I never watched any videos from Kurzgesagt).
I'd say the CC videos are good intros to their relative topics. Literature series could have done better if it was not mostly US and almost entirely English language works. Mythology sometimes looks at the myths with morals of today, which is a problem too.
Isn't the literature section English Lit or US Lit or something like that, or am I misremembering it?
Nope, just literature. And contains non-English and Non-American stuff like Dante, Homer, and Gabriel Garcia Marquez.
My bad. Fair points you're making then.
No problem!
I've always enjoyed The Thought Emporium for biology-related content. The videos are very "how to do x" and DIY-oriented, but nonetheless very interesting.
I should add it's not 100% biology but also chemistry, immunolog, electrics and physics subjects.
To me it feels like Coffee Break wanted to make a "Kurzgesagt EXPOSED" video and KG then published their own video on the issue of trust before CB was able to, likely to avoid a shitstorm in their direction that can't be tamed by facts. I don't really get the issues that CB raises in the video...
Atleast the german channel is funded by public broadcast, which usually means there are strings attached and scientific content needs to be confidently accurate. That probably also covers the english-only videos since 2017, but I'm not sure on that.
So this is a pretty interesting video by Coffee Break. Who is claiming that a video by Kurzgesagt was produced solely to preemptively address criticisms brought up by Coffee Break. This is somewhat significant because it paints Kurzgesagt as the opposite of being honest and transparent about the reason for the video. However other youtuber's such as CGP Grey have said Kurzgesagt's video was in the works for much longer. In my opinion, the truth is probably in the middle. Kurzgesagt probably wanted to address some of their videos and make them better, but they're also very sensitive to outside criticism and took an opportunity to avoid it.
The "small youtuber's stolen idea" argument kind of falls flat for me, it's about their channel after all, although I can see how it leaves a bit of a poor taste, Phillip should have told him.
Anyway, if you treat pop-science Youtube videos as a single source of truth, I think you should consider holding yourself to higher research standards. It's like reading the first paragraph of a wiki page and claiming that you've grasped a complex subject. It's can be a nice introduction, sure, but always do your reading.