• PaulSmackage [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Reading papers and contacting people in that field. I’ve found that university professors can especially direct you to materials in their field, and even like to chat about it sometimes. Half of my book collection was found this way.

    • Dorkyd68@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Idk man. YouTube tutorials are pretty helpful. Especially when I was studying electricity. Those Indian dudes are geniuses

    • bitfucker@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Why do we have teachers then? Listening and watching is absolutely a valid strategy of learning. You just need to make sure that the speakers are trustworthy on the subject.

      • BCsven@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Probably meant don’t rely on youtube, (as people produce fake info) while text books are rypically vetted, except in USA where Texas writes the curriculum supporting oil and gas and denying clinate change–and the other states purchase the Texas curriculum

  • Vampire [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    sci-hub and annas-archive

    I want to be less reliant on Wikipedia and Google Scholar, but in truth I still use them a lot

    • linucs@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      So you directly read papers on those topics? I tried doing that but I feel it requires a huge amount of background

      • Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I am not the person you are replying to.

        I read a lot of papers and it is hard if you don’t have background knowledge of the subject. If it’s something I am really interested in, then I will dive deep, if it’s not I will probably let it go when I get to the point where I no longer grasp what’s being said.

        • sunzu@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago
          1. Centralize anything and it will be ruined bubthe regime

          2. Wiki is already under a lot of pressure as is due to be as central as it is. There were rumors of them being under US Security service supervision so how good can it really be and where is it going to go now

      • BobDole [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Wikipedia editors are petty and incredibly biased. Start reading the talk pages, especially on controversial articles, and your opinion on Wikipedia’s objectivity will rapidly plummet.

        Also, it’s a bit like reddit: you find yourself learning so much about new topics, until you start reading about things you have actual expertise on, and you realize the people writing this shit are uninformed idiots, and, when you try to fix the information, the petty nerds who control it revert your changes and ban you.

  • Ioughttamow@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Well you see I’m a major GEN er alllllllllllll

    But seriously Wikipedia, YouTube guides, enthusiast forums. Usually try to read from multiple sources

  • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Escalate. Start with early digestible low quality sources (AI chat bots, short YouTube videos, old Reddit threads, etc.) to build a general familiarity with the subject matter space.

    Once you grasp the basic vocabulary and concepts, you know well enough what questions to ask to find more nuanced discussions and the right Wikipedia rabbit holes.

    If you need more comprehensive understanding than that, use your newfound familiarity to start skimming primary sources.

    Once you get more involved than deep dives into primary sources, you start blurring the lines of developing a new area of relative expertise.

  • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Read. Write. Execute. RWX. I’m going to piss some people off. Here goes: you are wasting your time if you watch videos. At all. A video moves at the pace it plays. It is linear. You can’t jump around easily. Reading? You can jump wherever you need immediately. You can have multiple sources at once. If you use a book, yes a physical book, you learn where things are and jump right to them. Read

    Write down a paraphrased version of what you read. Do not copy. Include references so you can return to source if needed. Note taking is a skill. Your notes should be organized in a way you can skim what you wrote as easily as the sources themselves.

    Execute. You don’t learn anything unless you do it. I’ve had too many students who watch Khan Academy, and think they understand it when they haven’t done it. They don’t score well on exams. Not my fault. I told them they have to do it to understand it.

    RWX. I await the flame war I just started with the video people.

    • nyctre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It might depend from person to person? I agree with you, tho. That’s also my preferred method.

      However, if the stuff you’re reading is fairly dense and not that well organized, you’re gonna have a harder time than watching a well written educational video or lecture and taking notes along the way.

    • linucs@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I repeat what I said to the other commenter: how do you find actual good and trustable channels on a specific topic?

      • oxjox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Finding a trustworthy source is the hardest part. I generally avoid anyone speaking too loudly of the subject. Someone who’s knowledgeable and confident, most times, can present calmly with context that’s accessible to most people.

        Neil deGrasse Tyson is a good example. He’s a good place to start for a broad range of topics. Then if I want more details I can dig deeper on my own. A lot of times, his commentary requires digging deeper because he speaks too broadly.

        I always check the source of a report or article; if there is no source, I don’t trust it. The source is usually a good place to ‘bookmark’ for further research.

        • Vampire [any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Trying to learn from ‘youtubers’ seems like asking for trouble.

          Lectures posted on youtube etc. are different I suppose.

      • fjordbasa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I highly disagree with looking for the widest set of opinions. Some opinions are stupid and/or baseless and just muddy the conversation (that’s part of how you get screaming talking heads on cable news shows).

        Personally I look for those with expertise who speak to their expertise. Just because someone has an advanced degree in one field does not mean their opinions in other fields are worth listening to. Also, I do a gut check. If is smells like BS, such as unfounded blanket statements or it seems like they’re pushing/selling something, I look into their qualifications a bit more or find someone else.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Go with people who are willing to use their real name, a lot of times it’ll be in the channel description, or sometimes in a channel trailer or intro video. Sometimes in an interview some other outlet/creator has done on the content creator. Then google that real name and check their work history and education credentials. You can usually find a LinkedIn. If they’re a proper academic, their university will usually have a brief page on them on the official university website. If they’re an alumni, they can sometimes be found in an alumni list, various class lists, or publicly accessible projects they worked on, though not always. Work history often cannot be as easily verified, but sometimes can be if you dig a little. Depends on field.

        It’s not too different from what you’d do if you wanted to hire someone to work for you in a small business or something.

        Once you have a significant knowledge base yourself, you can start to use the sniff test, though that’s always far from perfect. Less time consuming though.

    • linucs@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Follow up question: how do you find actual good and trustable channels on a specific topic?

      • monsterpiece42@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Not the other guy but I learn a lot of high quality information of YouTube. The golden rule for me is longer-form video is generally higher quality. People that know what they’re talking about typically aren’t going to explain complex things in 30 seconds, or at least not to the depth you should understand it.

        Aside from that, I look for people with actual qualifications first. Example, I love psychology so I will look for psychologists, licensed professional counselors, and so on. I’ll even listen to life coaches, but more selectively.

        The lower on the “chain” they are, the more I will do “spot checks” on information and see if they know what they’re talking about (ESPECIALLY if they’re making big or new claims about something). For that I’ll look into peer-reviewed studies and such for that.

        Once you get a small knowledge base it’s a little easier to continue. Talk something you have a clue about, and watch a video with that topic from another content creator.

        Do all of this for a while and you’ll find what you need to.

      • Muun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Youtube comments can be strangely helpful here, sometimes. If there’s a lot of “akshually” comments on every video, it may be a sign the youtuber is full of it. Not always true, but anything helps. Can also look up the youtuber’s credentials as well.

        • wewbull@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You know that channels can curate which comments they have visible on their videos? Mostly this is used to silence hateful comments, but it’s just as easily abused to remove all differing points of view.

          If all the comments agree, you’re probably in a curated bubble.

      • OhmsLawn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m going to think about that and get back to you. I think it’s mostly intuitive, based on many years of experience, but I’m not sure at this point.

        I also have to mention that I was half joking. I don’t use YT all that much for my profession. I would, but it’s just not entirely relevant.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Same way I’d inform myself on topics that are my field of expertise: reading, talking to experts, doing my own experiments and exploration, writing about it

    • tetris11@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I prefer to make unfounded comments to tired experts and note their answers, whilst spamming them with severe negative feedback to the point that they develop other interests out of exhaustion… leaving me the new expert in the field!

  • LaunchesKayaks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wikipedia rabbit holes every time lol.

    I am fascinated by medical stuff, especially conditions I have and similar conditions. Spent like 2 weeks reading about so many kinds of diseases.

  • cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I skim the Wikipedia page on whatever topic is being discussed and pretend to be an expert.