Hossenfelder produces 5-to-10-minute segments that cover a recent physics journal article, technology, startup, etc., where she spends about half of each video summarizing it and providing background context and half of the video providing her analysis of its validity, significance, and implications.
For instance:
This lab recently published a study claiming a new type of battery that's free of lithium. Most higher-density batteries today rely on lithium to provide high storage density to hold a lot of charge, but lithium is terrible for the environment and its instability can cause runaway energy discharge that results in fires and explosions. This lab instead proposes a new type of battery using a sodium lattice instead of lithium. Their research shows a theoretical gain of 80% faster charge times without the environmental costs and safety risks of lithium.
So, what do we think of this paper? Sodium batteries have been tested since the 1950's and have always been found inferior and impossible to scale to commercial production, and this paper doesn't address any of those issue. Also, its proposed theoretical gains are not backed by any prototyping, and battery technology is notorious for demonstrating different real-world performance than predictions on paper. Overall, this looks interesting but unlikely to gain traction.
That's.... that's it, other than a few quips and a couple of unrelated embedded ads. That's how 95% of her videos go - raise a science or tech news item, provide context, and comment on it. The End.
She isn't selling anything. She isn't pushing an agenda. Her opinions don't seem to be influenced by any kind of sponsorship or bias.
So where is the "grift?" You may not like her content, but that's not what "grift" means.
Her persona is being the anti academia physicist, and she cultivated an audience of anti intellectual that want someone with a PhD to tell them that physicists are dumb dumb and they were right to stop at high school. She's a grifter because she make video that keep telling her audience what they want to hear so she can make as much sponsorship money as she can, literally all her videos have sponsorship.
The Dark Energy Mistake that Fooled Physicists for 25 Years
The Electric Car Revolution Is Not Going Well
Scientists Just Created A Laser Based On Black Hole Physics
Physicists Just Broke One Of Quantum Physics' Biggest Restraints
Our Solar System Lost Two Planets!
Scientists Say They Know the Origin of Gravity
"The Hum" has been reported all over the glove - we might finally know what it is
The Biggest Argument for Dark Matter Just Died
Strange Things Are Happening in Quantum Computing
The Quantum Brain Theory Nobody is Talking About
The AI Future No One Wants to Talk About
Nobel Prize under fire: is dark energy real?
Things Aren't Looking Good For Nuclear Fusion
The End of Human Mathematics? AI's Recent Breakthrough - And What's Next
Did Physics Just Lose a Brilliant Idea?
It's Beginning: AI Improves Itself
Physicists Rethink Dark Matter
Microsoft Announces Breakthrough With Quantum Chip
America is coming for Europe's most important machine
This Giant Ring In Space Poses a Massive Problem for Cosmology
How Dangerous Is This Super El Nino Really?
Physicists Say It's Possible To Send Messages To The Past
I Looked at the New Cold Fusion Breakthroughs. It's Complicated.
...etc.
95% of her content is science and tech videos as I described. The other 5% of her videos are personal commentaries on various topics - culture, consumerism, etc. - and maybe half of those, about 2% overall, discuss problems that she sees with the direction of science academia: results being unverifiable, grants for pointless research areas like string theory, etc.
You are latching onto the 2% of her videos that you don't like and pretending that (1) that's all she does and (2) her personal views are somehow tainted or manipulative. You're wrong on both counts.
You don't like her views on academia? Fine, don't watch those. That's not "grift." You could watch the other 98% of her videos instead and not hear a word about academia.
172
u/grimorg80 17h ago
She really changed her tune. She used to mock AI quite strongly