Your argument against video seems mostly wrong to me. A large fraction of serious writing now has video or audio analogues - usually the author giving talks. In many cases (not all) the video is superior.
-
-
-
Interesting! I personally find retention is superior when reading as I cannot divert attention *and* consume the content at the same time. Video/audio have too much of a treadmill effect. Per my footnote, I can’t find respectable research backing this up. Yet. Anecdata FTW!
-
I get something out of video/audio that I find much harder in print: you can easily tell how the author feels about their work. This is sometimes the most valuable element - it can be motivating, and often points to interesting opportunities.
-
Related: this remarkable defense of lectures by Gian-Carlo Rota: https://twitter.com/michael_nielsen/status/834278805971668992 … I'm not a big fan of lectures. But for someone like Church it'd be worth making an exception.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
great line of thought.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not the most rigorous, but some food for thought here on text vs audio for complex material absorption (they found little difference) https://assets.cureus.com/uploads/original_article/pdf/9871/1516027590-20180115-3390-rwpcnd.pdf …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Great post, been loving your writing recently
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.