I think that methodology is wrong. If they analyzed only one instance, then the whole follwer-followee thing might be completely off. And while they measured how many replied frequently, it lacks the “how many replies they got” side

It’s like comparing engagement on whole network vs via only one edge

Bad article. Person who wrote it clearly has no idea how LLMs work and I suspect read more Sci-Fi books than statistics/neural nets ones. “It is not even wrong”

Net Profits: Dropped by 71% to $2.3 billion in Q4 2024.

Since when 2.4 billion net profit is terrible?

“Yes, we earned billions but it’s actually less than the year before!” Dude, go out and touch some grass…

Access would require being logged into the CVS app and connected to the store’s Wi-Fi

Wow. I had to check if the page is the onion

You can’t cover a topic in 35-60 seconds, and not with enough nuance that some people won’t misunderstand something fundamental.

In country X there are riots. Side A with side B has been clashing since Wednesday, there are N people killed and M wounded.

That’s 30 seconds and all the nuance that’s needed. Next news

many others won’t, and they’ll get their “facts” from TikTok just because you can ingest a lot of content in a very short time

Then at least they know something is happening

“Just one more funny cat video to boost my mood… It’s only 20sec long, and I can afford that in my schedule.” Replace “cat video and 20sec” with “pull and dollar,” and it sounds just like a gambling addict.

You mean like 9GAG? Or TV being on non-stop? Or radio?

When was the last time you can recall somebody committing arson over losing an app?

I bet it’s happening all the time. It just doesn’t make the news until the next “game videos are causing violence”, “rock music makes you kill yourself”, “Harry Potter is satanism” etc becomes a hot topic to tie it to

If you don’t know why something is happening, I guarantee somebody with an agenda will happily fill in the blanks for you.

When it comes to current affairs there is no getting to real “why”. Any opinion on why is a personal spin. Are you really cross-checking all the sources referenced in 20 minutes video? If not, you are on the mercy of the talking head the same as in 30 secs. Thing is, if you spent on one POV 30 secs and then another few, it becomes apparent what is the fact and what is opinion. To do the same in long formats you have to spend a lot of time on one topic, where there are many happening around the world

short-burst video format is engaging, but it allows no room for nuance, no room for fact checking or deeper breakdowns

it simply is other format, for other means. Since yt started forcing creators to put at least 12min videos for max ads revenue, you can’t cover a meaningful amount of topics in an hour. Unless you start speeding them up and constantly clicking to get to the meat of the video. And that’s why the short format is gaining popularity. That it lacks depth? Of course, but if I’m interested in depth, I go search other formats. Most of the info I want to get is “more or less what is happening everywhere”. I don’t have to understand the nuances of political and societal situation in a country on the other side of the world, to want to know that there are riots there rn

The fact that most of people use it for cats and drama? It’s been there since IRC