One useful function for AI would be to watch YouTube videos and extract any useful information into concise paragraphs. I am looking to be informed, not entertained.
I am saying I am not watching the video. I would prefer a tight paragraph or two about whatever the videographer thinks are the extraordinary circumstances.
I know what you are saying, and I fully support you in your mission to consume content faster, it’s just got nothing to do with the topic of this thread.
Not sure if you’re mostly joking but TT has tons of long-form content as well. It’s one of the main reasons I don’t use it - all my recommendations are super interesting 7+ min videos (I think I get too anxious to open the app knowing it’s going to open up to some super in-depth breakdown on a very specific topic. It’s insane how good their algorithm is. It practically never misses
Most people don’t like a paragraph worth of information being stretched out into a 14 minute video. Luckily someone already provided the info in another comment.
Death of attention span is real but not wanting to listen to ten minutes of bullshit waffle, please like and subscribe, for two minutes of information is not it.
That could be someone’s creative output. Hell, that could be the paycheck someone’s eating off of-- and you and others like you out here “can it be condensed? I rly don’t wanna hear it”. If it’s not death of attention span, then it’s atomized, anti-social fuckshit; so either way this ain’t the defense strat you think it is
Ok? We’re not obligated to watch stuff just because it’s someone’s creative output. We don’t owe this person a paycheck through YouTube ads. Everyone’s got the right to have the necessities of life but that’s got nothing to do with this. Different people have different interests, and someone who’s really into this subject or this creator might want to watch the whole thing, but not everyone has to.
It’s the principle of the thing. You clearly have the free-time, otherwise you wouldn’t be here. You clearly have the interest, otherwise you wouldn’t be in this thread. And yet, you demand an abridging of someone’s creative output to suit your entitlement. Tfu.
If you only have the time to demand abridgings of people’s work, maybe you shouldn’t be on this site. I’m sure twitter or reddit would be more your speed.
Still not a defense for demanding abridgings to suit one’s entitlement. If I think something is sensationalized or clickbait, I move the fuck on without demanding somebody else play stenographer for me.
Basically they weren’t originally planning on taking a photo of earth from the moon. The fact that they even had a camera was due to interest from a few astronauts in the earlier missions. The camera had its viewfinder stripped to save weight, so the astronauts couldnt see what they were filming. On that mission they were only planning to take photos of the moon’s surface. And then they decided in the moment as the earthrise happened, that it needed to be photographed, and out of tons of shots they only got one clear image.
Maybe a little clickbaity but “It’s highly imporbable that they got this shot” doesn’t ring the same
While I’m still burning that SNW introduced the first main cast person with disability and killed them off just to lean on the crutch of development-by-death-of-mentor for Uhura, I’m super happy that Bruce Horak is now being regularly cast in guest star and recurring television roles in Canada.
It’s a long way from a Star Trek stint being a career-limiting choice as it was viewed in the past.
I strongly suspect all solutions will either be invalid, or be limited to the speed of light.
The universe seems to have a lot of weird quirks (the speed of light being 1) what they have in common is that they make time paradoxes impossible. This points to some deeper physics causing these disparate effects. Anything travelling faster than C can be configured as a time machine, and so create paradoxes.
It’s disappointing in its limitations, yes, but another step in bringing warp-driven travel into a more mainstream conversation and line of theoretical research in physics.
As with Albucierre’s proof, theoretical research always starts with the corner solutions and odd cases to reduce the variables.
Well, now I know who was the executive on the org chart responsible for all of Viacom and more recently Paramount Global’s stunningly awful corporate strategic communications.
There have been a lot of senior or management changes one tier down since the merger, but perhaps what was really needed was for Baklish and his top VPs to exit.
Yeah, it’s hard to speak in defense of their comms over the past few years.
I’ve never had an overly bad impression of Bakish, though - at the very least, he didn’t make a total ass of himself during the strikes, and seems better than, say, Zaslav over at Warner.
But as always, there are no true “good guys” at this level.
All I can muster to care about is story is the thought that my personal data, collected via their mobile app, might be changing companies on a thumb drive, at the same time.
‘Space Babies’ was a classic RTD dumpster fire. It felt like a first draft and the exposition dump at the beginning was very badly done. The script editor should have pushed back hard on this one.
‘The Devil’s Chord’ was better although hamstrung by the fact that they couldn’t afford the rights to any Beatles music.
Ncuti and Millie have quickly established themselves and I’m looking forward to seeing what the rest of the season brings.
So far, it’s better than all of the Whittaker run and probably 1/2 of Capaldi.
Only 2 real complaints:
Did he really need to say “Space Babies” every few minutes? Seemed excessive.
Is it wise casting a drag queen as a villain given all the anti-drag queen sentiment? I know, I get it, maybe it’s not as bad in the UK as it is here, but do we need to further demonize drag queens?
+1 note… LOL…
I was convinced the lost chord was going to be the mystery chord that opens A Hard Day’s Night.
Is it wise casting a drag queen as a villain given all the anti-drag queen sentiment?
Gosh, what a loaded question! I think it ultimately boils down to a question of representation - these things shouldn’t be a problem in isolation, but they can be a problem if it’s part of a greater pattern. It does sound like Davies is intent on weaving queerness throughout all aspects of this series, so that will probably make a difference.
I was convinced the lost chord was going to be the mystery chord that opens A Hard Day’s Night.
I had the legendary chord from “A Day in the Life” in mind, which of course isn’t really possible on a single piano (at least, not to its full effect).
I could not get into the baby episode. The talking babies just put me off. Might have been scarier than the actual monster.
But the devil’s cord was better. Great concept. Good mix of fun and serious and a nice follow up to the toy maker. I didn’t feel it really made the most use of the beatles though, the maestro could have been in any time period with any musician. I was pleasantly surprised by the twist at the end.
RTD likes his recurring threads, so I guess the pantheon is going to anchor this series. So far we’ve had masters (gods?) of toys and music. What next - the different parts of what makes being human? Love? Food? And how does Ruby fit into it.
So far ncuti and millie are fitting in well. A bit different, bringing their own flair, but still capturing the right feel.
It does seem that RTD is going harder into serialization this time around - the Ruby story reminds me a lot of Clara’s tenure with Eleven (which wasn’t the best, but what can you do?).
All right, it’s hard to make the case that this one was less silly than “Space Babies,” but I enjoyed this one more, largely on the strength of Jinkx Monsson’s delightfully unhinged performance as Maestro, and the fact that I love The Beatles (not that they get a lot to do).
This is one of those high-concept episodes built around an interesting premise (“the world would end if there was no music”) that DW often does really well. I think in this case, they could have done a little more to show the lives of the people in this music-free world, but it worked well enough.
Having Lennon/McCartney finish the Maestro off with the lost chord was blindingly obvious, and extremely perfect.
I’ve got to say, Chris Mason did an amazing job capturing John Lennon’s mannerisms while singing. I happened to watch “Let It Be” the other day, and the guy did his homework. Pour one out for George and Ringo, though - they really didn’t get anything to do.
quarks
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.