Since 2016, I've been thinking about how clear, informative, non-academic talks don't seem very popular.
In 2016, @garybernhardt gave a talk on reproducibility at StrangeLoop which I thought was quite good. It clearly explained a non-obvious idea and came in well under time.
-
-
This is interesting because a couple years earlier, I saw a talked that covered the same topic, wildly popular (most YT viewed talked from the conference of all time) but incomprehensible. I didn't even know what the talk was about until I saw Gary's talk 2 years later.
Show this thread -
After watching the wildly popular talk, I asked about twenty people at the conference if they could explain what the talk was about and how the 2nd half related to the 1st half. Literally zero people told me they thought they understood the talk.
Show this thread -
I kept asking about the popular talk for about a year and eventually found one person who said they understood the talk, but after talking to them at length, they couldn't explain the talk. This talk was widely loved and is still highly cited today.
Show this thread -
Gary's talk was so good, so clear, that everyone I talked to thought the talk was bad. If there was more vague ranting or talking around the point instead of actually conveying the point, I suspect people would've liked the talk.
Show this thread -
This also happens at work! A friend of mine went up for "senior staff" promo (and succeeded), but someone on the promo committee objected b/c "that could've been done by a SWE-2", as if figuring out a simple way to do something valuable makes it less valuable.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Wait wtf that was my favorite talk that year
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.