It would be interesting to experiment with this in text form, with gaze tracking.
Show N guys a tweet or bluesky post from someone with feminine avatar and name. Track their pupils as they hit that big ol reply button to offer their opinion.
How many words into the post did they actually read?
Imagine finding out that on average they get like 5 words into the post before slamming the reply button to regurgitate their hot dogshit at the poster, if the poster appears to be a woman.
With a man, it's 10 words (Americans have a 6th grade reading level after all).
tbh if YouTube wasnt juicing metrics for investors they could just block comments if they haven't watched 10% through (previous views count) and shitty comment volume would plummet
I love all of her videos so much. she is so brilliant.
the first video I saw of hers she wanted to talk about string theory but decided to do so while breezing through a Binding of Isaac run and it is SO MY SHIT
What is the term or phrase you use / you think it would be wise for *others* to use when referring to:
[the large and varied list of surprising observations for which we do not yet have a consensus explanation (and which are colloquially referred to as "the dark matter problem")].
I'm sorry, I teach this but this is misrepresenting the connection between theory and observation, and ignoring some interesting challenges with the dark matter hypothesis.
Also, we have not directly detected dark matter. Period.
And it doesn't make the reply guys right, but stuff like this is why I have to spend huge chunks of my class time unteaching "That thing I learned on YouTube". 🤷♀️
It's a terrible place for this.
Yup. Having evidence supporting them doesn't erase their status as a theory. Dark matter as a theory is well supported with evidence. But it is not the only way to explain that evidence (although is the best, especially collected).
I'm not understanding this. Her thesis is: this evidence, observations which are not explained by the current theory, we call dark matter. It is an open problem, these observations we have named dark matter. These observations require a theory, a theory of dark matter, to explain them.
Comments
The followup
Imagine if they released that data publicly.
Like, discovering the average "well actually" reply to a woman happened literally within 10 seconds.
Obviously they hide that data for themselves.
Show N guys a tweet or bluesky post from someone with feminine avatar and name. Track their pupils as they hit that big ol reply button to offer their opinion.
How many words into the post did they actually read?
With a man, it's 10 words (Americans have a 6th grade reading level after all).
They clicked the link, and without even hitting play they just shat out their hot take based on the title.
It explains like, all those comments.
the first video I saw of hers she wanted to talk about string theory but decided to do so while breezing through a Binding of Isaac run and it is SO MY SHIT
[the large and varied list of surprising observations for which we do not yet have a consensus explanation (and which are colloquially referred to as "the dark matter problem")].
Also, we have not directly detected dark matter. Period.
It's a terrible place for this.
A theory backed by some degree of evidence is still a theory.
And we still talk about "the theory of evolution" which creationists take to mean it's just something made up. But it IS a theory!