CileTheSane

And if I know the right way of doing it I already understand why it's better because I want to use it in this situation. Making the students who already understand the lesson do it the wrong way is just a waste of their time.

Even a sentence or two would help me judge if it's worth my time. If I'm in public and don't have headphones I'm not watching a video, especially if I have no idea what it is. If you tell me why I should care about the video I might make a note to watch it when I get home.

Secondly, I'm not just going to click a random link. I have no idea if it's even relevant or a bot or a troll who just puts the links in every thread they come across.

which would be time intensive

The 5 minutes it would take them to type a quick summary is much less time intensive than the hour it would take everyone who sees the post to watch the videos and see if they care.

Video is the least convenient way to share information. For example, it's impossible to skim a video to see if it's something you're interested in or to find the information you're looking for. With text it's easy to do a quick skim to see if it's something worth your time.

but because "I didn't teach it to everyone yet" we couldn't use loops.

That is aggravating. "I didn't teach the class the proper way to do this task, so you have to use the tedious way." What is the logic behind that other than wasting everyone's time?

Something at least point form of what the video is about would be helpful. I'm in public and don't have headphones, I'm not going to watch a video (much less 3). If context is presented I might make a note to watch it when I get home.

Any questions?

TL:DW?

200 upvotes

"I bet no one else understood this."

I'm glad to hear they are willing to sacrifice the safety of my system for their fraction of a penny.

I used to not run an ad block. I figured the ads didn't bother me so why bother?

Then I encountered a banner ad that screamed "HELLOOOOOOOOOO" anytime the mouse went over it and I couldn't download an ad blocker fast enough.

Advertising companies will do anything they can to annoy the shit out of you, then act like people running ad blockers are the problem.

I wonder why ad tech can‘t be „Let‘s show ads that correspond to what‘s being talked about on that website.“ Kinda like what Google suggested with Topics but without following me through the internet.

They could be. Sites could talk directly to advertisers, and put the ad directly into the page itself instead of asking the ad server for a random ad. Most ad blockers probably wouldn't notice it because it's part of the actual page.

But then they'd lose out on the tracking data and would be responsible to make sure the ad doesn't annoy the shit out of you, so they're not going to do that.

You'll have to explain to me how not compensating someone for their work has been ethical since the 90s.

Opening my computer up to Malware is not worth the fraction of a penny that the person who did the work will receive from my click.

This is 100% the fault of shitty advertisers spamming us with literal scams, malware, and spyware.

And the shitty websites running those ads with just a shrug of their shoulders saying "oops, 3rd party. I can't be expected to control what's on my website."