17 ms·

I share his videos here but nobody seems to see them and/or care enough to vote; all I get is crickets. It's baffling to me. Examples: - https://news.ycombinat

I share his videos here but nobody seems to see them and/or care enough to vote; all I get is crickets. It's baffling to me. Examples: - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48802162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48802162 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48395520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48395520 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47043208 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47043208

throw2ih020 2mo ago
HN audience prefers text to video; videos rarely do well here compared to other sites.
- TedDoesntTalk 2mo ago
  Agree. I almost never watch them when posted in comments. Sometimes if it’s a main article I might.
- wojciii 2mo ago
  I ignore video posts. Why would I spend 20 minutes watching something when I can read the same in one or two minutes? I read inhumanely fast.
  - glitchcrab 2mo ago
    The person presenting is also important. I may be interested in the topic but if I don't like the presenter or their delivery then I'm still not going to watch it. Text doesn't have this issue.
  - whstl 2mo ago
    I ignore video posts because my video watching time is after-hours. I browse HN at work in-between GH Actions runs, compiling and Claude thinking, so no time for videos.
  - mboto 2mo ago
    I didn’t realise you were committing literary war crimes! Please read more humanely! Books have rights too!
    - stavros 2mo ago
      No, if he reads humanely he reads slowly.
      - lemiffe 2mo ago
        I'm not sure if you got it, that inhumanely != inhumanly. Where inhumanely is without consideration for the human race, whereas the other is non-human-like.
        dataflow 2mo ago
        > I'm not sure if you got it, that inhumanely != inhumanly. Where inhumanely is without consideration for the human race, whereas the other is non-human-like. Note they're also synonyms, so the confusion is understandable: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhuman https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhum... https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhumane https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhum...
  - jbailes 2mo ago
    ^This. I find it frustrating with how so many things seem to be moving to video, even simple instructions.
    - mschuster91 2mo ago
      Monetization. It's incredibly hard to monetize text content, particularly these days where Google's search AI has all but killed clickthrough rates. Youtube however, that will reliably give you revenue share.
  - gblargg 2mo ago
    These says I just ask YouTube's AI for a summary of the video. Then I can decide whether the presenter is worth another 20 minutes of my time.
    - ivanmontillam 2mo ago
      I do that too, and meditate if YouTube wounded themselves by adding that feature. View rates must have dipped for a percentage we don't know of, but definitely made a dent.
  - teaearlgraycold 2mo ago
    I read at talking speed so not as much to gain with text.
  - darksim905 2mo ago
    That may be so, but are you skimming, or actually retaining the the things you care about? Video can have a lot more impact and staying power when it comes to things that matter in this context.
    - mitkebes 2mo ago
      For me personally, I retain much less information from video vs reading it. For text, I change my reading speed based on comprehension, going faster for things I know, and slower or rereading for things that are new or complicated. For video, you're expected to consume the info at the rate provided in the video, losing attention when they spend too long on info you're already finished with, and then blowing by other info that I want to spend more time considering. There are options like adjusting video playback speed and rewinding, but that's not how video is typically consumed and is much less convenient than just altering your reading speed.
  - Krypto26 2mo ago
    But do you comprehend it?
- spacedcowboy 2mo ago
  This. I never watch video posts. I can skim-read a text site in seconds to see if it's worth a real read. I can't do that with video, and there's always some ads in it, whether the author put them there or not. I hate ads. And it's not just HN either, video is a very poor substitute for a well written article. Video can augment a well-written article, but it can't replace it.
  - gosub100 2mo ago
    Posting here for anyone who might not know this: you can click and hold on most YouTube videos and they will play at 2x. I find that to be a good test at whether the host is communicating effectively. If I can understand them perfectly clear at 2X they are talking too slowly.
    - ta8903 2mo ago
      I watch everything other than songs or something cinematic at 2x anyways.
    - bombcar 2mo ago
      Then you get things like the ATP (I can't bring myself to say ATP podcast because La Brea Tar Pits and all that) where two hosts are fine at 1.5x and the third becomes a chipmunk. Maybe they can make Overcast have dynamic speed based on speaker.
      - sneakymichael 2mo ago
        Who of the three do you feel speaks much faster naturally?
        bombcar 2mo ago
        Here's where I admit that I can't identify them - but offhand I think it was Siracusa. I know because I tried speeding up a recent episode and he started talking and I had to slow it back down.
        2mo ago
- darkwater 2mo ago
  But still, there are many many HNers who binge watch YT videos all the time, and share it here, or suggest YT videos as "dive deeper" links on many topics.
- geekamongus 2mo ago
  Too much "Hey guys".
- davkan 2mo ago
  I watch plenty of videos but it doesn’t coincide with my reading of HN.
VladVladikoff 2mo ago
I clicked on one, he was rambling about wearing sunglasses because of studio lights, seems like pointless drivel, so I stopped watching.
- samplifier 2mo ago
  Have you tried SponsorBlock? https://github.com/ajayyy/SponsorBlock https://github.com/ajayyy/SponsorBlock
shevy-java 2mo ago
Voting on hackernews is a bit weird compared to reddit. The whole UI is strange to me. Having said that, I noticed that there is in general too much content to consistently e. g. vote or do similar actions. I was watching Rossman's video almost daily in the past; stopped doing so a while ago simply because of lack of time on my part. I need to choose more carefully where I invest my time. (Also, for some reason, when Rossman was in New York, his videos had a better punch; not sure if I am the only one noticing this but he seemed to have a better focus when he was still in New York, even though I understand he relocated, to stop getting milked by politicians in New York.)
- ivanmontillam 2mo ago
  Not needing to be at the top of his game anymore makes anyone lose that sharpness. As you just said, he doesn't need to fight New York politicians anymore. I stopped coding for the past year or so and I'm considering going back because I definitely feel my own sharpness lost.
xboxnolifes 2mo ago
I watch long form videos on topics I care about. If I care about the topic, I likely have already seen the videos. But I'm not going to watch a 20 minute video posted to HN to discuss it. If it's not something I can skim over in 3 minutes, it's too long. Take the post we're on right now. You can read through the entire contents of the article in 1 minute.
jimnotgym 2mo ago
Oh that guy, I like him. He puts his money where his mouth is too. Weighing in and challenging people to sue. Good guy, intense but good. I think it is a shame youtube is forcing creators into longer videos
dspillett 2mo ago
Video content, particularly on youtube, gets very little traction here generally. I watch his videos, but not from links here and that is probably what you are seeing: those of us who might follow your link have already seen the video (likely via grayjay rather than youtube) and will skip over it to the next interesting new thing. People who don't already watch him will see “[video] (youtube.com), 1 point, discuss” and think “oh, another video that could be a few paragraphs of text which would be much faster to read than watch, that so far no one else has seen as worth interacting with, preceded by two unskippable adverts”. A link to youtube is only going to get much attention if it is lucky to have a title that jumps out to a few people so it gains the first few votes and/or comments that get the ball rolling. Even then Louis' videos aren't going to get a hot debate going: most people either entirely agree so don't see the point commenting further, or they aren't the sort of people who are reading HN at all or are but don't follow video links.
lotsofpulp 2mo ago
Unless the video is about an extraordinary natural phenomenon that can be seen, video (and audio) is strictly inferior to text for communicating information.
- idiotsecant 2mo ago
  that seems pretty easily falsifiable. Sometimes you want want to consume content while doing something else that precludes reading. Sometimes you want to relax your eyeballs after staring at a screen all day. Theres plenty of reasons to consume audio or video.

throw2ih020 2mo ago

HN audience prefers text to video; videos rarely do well here compared to other sites.

TedDoesntTalk 2mo ago
Agree. I almost never watch them when posted in comments. Sometimes if it’s a main article I might.
wojciii 2mo ago
I ignore video posts. Why would I spend 20 minutes watching something when I can read the same in one or two minutes? I read inhumanely fast.
- glitchcrab 2mo ago
  The person presenting is also important. I may be interested in the topic but if I don't like the presenter or their delivery then I'm still not going to watch it. Text doesn't have this issue.
- whstl 2mo ago
  I ignore video posts because my video watching time is after-hours. I browse HN at work in-between GH Actions runs, compiling and Claude thinking, so no time for videos.
- mboto 2mo ago
  I didn’t realise you were committing literary war crimes! Please read more humanely! Books have rights too!
  - stavros 2mo ago
    No, if he reads humanely he reads slowly.
    - lemiffe 2mo ago
      I'm not sure if you got it, that inhumanely != inhumanly. Where inhumanely is without consideration for the human race, whereas the other is non-human-like.
      - dataflow 2mo ago
        > I'm not sure if you got it, that inhumanely != inhumanly. Where inhumanely is without consideration for the human race, whereas the other is non-human-like. Note they're also synonyms, so the confusion is understandable: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhuman https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhum... https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhumane https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/inhum...
- jbailes 2mo ago
  ^This. I find it frustrating with how so many things seem to be moving to video, even simple instructions.
  - mschuster91 2mo ago
    Monetization. It's incredibly hard to monetize text content, particularly these days where Google's search AI has all but killed clickthrough rates. Youtube however, that will reliably give you revenue share.
- gblargg 2mo ago
  These says I just ask YouTube's AI for a summary of the video. Then I can decide whether the presenter is worth another 20 minutes of my time.
  - ivanmontillam 2mo ago
    I do that too, and meditate if YouTube wounded themselves by adding that feature. View rates must have dipped for a percentage we don't know of, but definitely made a dent.
- teaearlgraycold 2mo ago
  I read at talking speed so not as much to gain with text.
- darksim905 2mo ago
  That may be so, but are you skimming, or actually retaining the the things you care about? Video can have a lot more impact and staying power when it comes to things that matter in this context.
  - mitkebes 2mo ago
    For me personally, I retain much less information from video vs reading it. For text, I change my reading speed based on comprehension, going faster for things I know, and slower or rereading for things that are new or complicated. For video, you're expected to consume the info at the rate provided in the video, losing attention when they spend too long on info you're already finished with, and then blowing by other info that I want to spend more time considering. There are options like adjusting video playback speed and rewinding, but that's not how video is typically consumed and is much less convenient than just altering your reading speed.
- Krypto26 2mo ago
  But do you comprehend it?
spacedcowboy 2mo ago
This. I never watch video posts. I can skim-read a text site in seconds to see if it's worth a real read. I can't do that with video, and there's always some ads in it, whether the author put them there or not. I hate ads. And it's not just HN either, video is a very poor substitute for a well written article. Video can augment a well-written article, but it can't replace it.
- gosub100 2mo ago
  Posting here for anyone who might not know this: you can click and hold on most YouTube videos and they will play at 2x. I find that to be a good test at whether the host is communicating effectively. If I can understand them perfectly clear at 2X they are talking too slowly.
  - ta8903 2mo ago
    I watch everything other than songs or something cinematic at 2x anyways.
  - bombcar 2mo ago
    Then you get things like the ATP (I can't bring myself to say ATP podcast because La Brea Tar Pits and all that) where two hosts are fine at 1.5x and the third becomes a chipmunk. Maybe they can make Overcast have dynamic speed based on speaker.
    - sneakymichael 2mo ago
      Who of the three do you feel speaks much faster naturally?
      - bombcar 2mo ago
        Here's where I admit that I can't identify them - but offhand I think it was Siracusa. I know because I tried speeding up a recent episode and he started talking and I had to slow it back down.
      - 2mo ago
darkwater 2mo ago
But still, there are many many HNers who binge watch YT videos all the time, and share it here, or suggest YT videos as "dive deeper" links on many topics.
geekamongus 2mo ago
Too much "Hey guys".
davkan 2mo ago
I watch plenty of videos but it doesn’t coincide with my reading of HN.

VladVladikoff 2mo ago

I clicked on one, he was rambling about wearing sunglasses because of studio lights, seems like pointless drivel, so I stopped watching.

samplifier 2mo ago
Have you tried SponsorBlock? https://github.com/ajayyy/SponsorBlock https://github.com/ajayyy/SponsorBlock

shevy-java 2mo ago

Voting on hackernews is a bit weird compared to reddit. The whole UI is strange to me. Having said that, I noticed that there is in general too much content to consistently e. g. vote or do similar actions. I was watching Rossman's video almost daily in the past; stopped doing so a while ago simply because of lack of time on my part. I need to choose more carefully where I invest my time. (Also, for some reason, when Rossman was in New York, his videos had a better punch; not sure if I am the only one noticing this but he seemed to have a better focus when he was still in New York, even though I understand he relocated, to stop getting milked by politicians in New York.)

ivanmontillam 2mo ago
Not needing to be at the top of his game anymore makes anyone lose that sharpness. As you just said, he doesn't need to fight New York politicians anymore. I stopped coding for the past year or so and I'm considering going back because I definitely feel my own sharpness lost.

xboxnolifes 2mo ago

I watch long form videos on topics I care about. If I care about the topic, I likely have already seen the videos. But I'm not going to watch a 20 minute video posted to HN to discuss it. If it's not something I can skim over in 3 minutes, it's too long. Take the post we're on right now. You can read through the entire contents of the article in 1 minute.

jimnotgym 2mo ago

Oh that guy, I like him. He puts his money where his mouth is too. Weighing in and challenging people to sue. Good guy, intense but good. I think it is a shame youtube is forcing creators into longer videos

dspillett 2mo ago

Video content, particularly on youtube, gets very little traction here generally. I watch his videos, but not from links here and that is probably what you are seeing: those of us who might follow your link have already seen the video (likely via grayjay rather than youtube) and will skip over it to the next interesting new thing. People who don't already watch him will see “[video] (youtube.com), 1 point, discuss” and think “oh, another video that could be a few paragraphs of text which would be much faster to read than watch, that so far no one else has seen as worth interacting with, preceded by two unskippable adverts”. A link to youtube is only going to get much attention if it is lucky to have a title that jumps out to a few people so it gains the first few votes and/or comments that get the ball rolling. Even then Louis' videos aren't going to get a hot debate going: most people either entirely agree so don't see the point commenting further, or they aren't the sort of people who are reading HN at all or are but don't follow video links.

lotsofpulp 2mo ago

Unless the video is about an extraordinary natural phenomenon that can be seen, video (and audio) is strictly inferior to text for communicating information.

idiotsecant 2mo ago
that seems pretty easily falsifiable. Sometimes you want want to consume content while doing something else that precludes reading. Sometimes you want to relax your eyeballs after staring at a screen all day. Theres plenty of reasons to consume audio or video.