500
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 days ago

Hes supposed to be a credible source, hes an educator, hes the modern day Bill Nye.

There are no credible sources on YouTube. He's just a guy with a computer and a camera. Youtube is about selling you stuff, people need to accept that.

[-] KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works 19 points 4 days ago

The beauty of YouTube is that the goals of the company are not necessarily the goals of the content creators.

I'll take any chance I can get to shout out Nick Zentner. Hes a professor of Geology at Central Washington University and he has been posting full length lectures on YouTube for more than 15 years. He is a comprehensive expert in his field and regularly features experts in related fields to help discuss whatever topic he is on at the time.

I used to use his videos to fall asleep, but I have developed a genuine love of geology and vulcanology that I wouldn't have known about otherwise.

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

You can find some older, rare exceptions, but it is impossible to maintain integrity and fulfill the YouTube algorithms. People think YouTube content is credible because YouTube algorithms give you what you want to hear.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

A hyper rational take.

[-] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago

Great starting point for wasting time maybe.

Let me waste 5 minutes reading slop than another 20 min tying to figure out if its a hallucination or just not accurate. 25 minutes that could have been reading a credible accurate source...

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

In the scenario, what pointed you towards said credible accurate source? Google?

[-] sem 2 points 3 days ago

Not op, but a search engine is a better starting point than an LLM, because it is a predictable tool, fetching internet resources which can be evaluated on their merits.

The AI presents itself as the actual information.

I see too many people in my daily life saying "the ai summary said..." and it is worse than useless.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

A page rank based search engine would still require a vetting of results.

Google is mostly AI currated results, it will push approved and sponsored souces.

[-] sem 1 points 3 days ago

Google is shit.

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago

Google is a search engine, not a source.

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

what pointed you

Yes, that was implied.

this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
500 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

86987 readers
3203 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS