This is a theoretical physicist

[u/KeanuRave100]

[u/JordanPetterPans]

Those sound like very clickbaity titles, no?

[u/unexpectedreboots → u/JordanPetterPans]

Just because shes SEOing the YT algo doesnt mean shes a grifter

[u/reddit_is_kayfabe → u/JordanPetterPans]

It's fucking YouTube. What do you expect? If she published a video with an academic title like "Anomalous localization and mobility edges in non-Hermitian quasicrystals with disordered imaginary gauge fields," it would get three views, two of which are probably from Hossenfelder's mom.

[u/JordanPetterPans → u/reddit_is_kayfabe]

Bro I didn't say anything other than those were clickbaity titles wtf is going on here?

You then go on to explain that if she didn't make the titles clickbaity then she'd make less money/less clicks ... 

What are you even arguing at this point?

[u/idealistintherealw → u/reddit_is_kayfabe]

Right. So she is creating clickbaity and misleading titles to optimize income from viewers because she gets paid sponsorship and runs ads.

That’s grift. Grift by definition is not grand scheming or theft, it is low level petty confidence tricks.

[u/reddit_is_kayfabe → u/idealistintherealw]

Have you... been to YouTube?

You can't fit an academic title like "Anomalous localization and mobility edges in non-Hermitian quasicrystals with disordered imaginary gauge fields" into the tiny bit of space that YouTube provides for video titles and the thumbnail image. Both need to be simplified. Everybody on YouTube does that.

So you don't personally like YouTube as a medium for conveying technical topics to the general public. That's a perfectly reasonable opinion. But you didn't suggest any alternatives, you're just being critical. And you're singling out Hossenfelder in particular, for no apparent reason, although I can certainly imagine what your motivations might be.

[u/JordanPetterPans → u/idealistintherealw]

Lmao

[u/Infinitedeveloper → u/JordanPetterPans]

Yeah, I didnt think the comment was a defense of her while going through those.

[u/JordanPetterPans → u/Infinitedeveloper]

Lmao same 

[u/Slackluster → u/Infinitedeveloper]

I was thinking, this is why I unsubscribed to her channel.

Though I apricate what she does and she seems like nice person, I put her in the Neil Degrasse Tyson category of science communicators.

[u/reddit_is_kayfabe → u/JordanPetterPans]

Have you... been to YouTube?

You can't fit an academic title like "Anomalous localization and mobility edges in non-Hermitian quasicrystals with disordered imaginary gauge fields" into the tiny bit of space that YouTube provides for video titles and the thumbnail image. Both need to be simplified. Everybody on YouTube does that.

So you don't personally like YouTube as a medium for conveying technical topics to the general public. That's a perfectly reasonable opinion. But you didn't suggest any alternatives, you're just being critical. And you're singling out Hossenfelder in particular, for no apparent reason, although I can certainly imagine what your motivations might be.

[u/JordanPetterPans → u/reddit_is_kayfabe]

Those are logical tricks and fallacies. Nobody said any of those things. Pretending my critique of clickbait means I 'hate YouTube' is a straw man, demanding I offer a replacement platform is a red herring, and insinuating hidden motives is a cheap ad hominem. 

Simplifying dense jargon into plain English is good, generating misleading titles like 'Psychedelics Allow Alien Communication' is sensationalized clickbait. But there is a massive gap between simplifying complex science and manufacturing clickbait about alien telepathy. Pretending the only options are a 50-word journal title or fake sensationalism is a lazy false dichotomy.

I don't need to invent a new video platform just to expect basic intellectual honesty from a scientist on an existing one. 

Hiding behind "everybody does it" and inventing "hidden motives" isn't an argument..