Personally, I found that they used to be a “follow the passion” channel. They were interested in a topic and shared what they found out. You could tell they cared.

Slowly, even before the private equity thing, you could tell that they were making videos for business reasons. Either cause they thought it was going to be a popular topic, or because it was going to make them money from a partnership.

Both types of content results in educational videos. The problem is that when you start with a conclusion and work backwards to the content, instead of working from curiosity, it really shows.

There continues to be content out there that starts with passion and works towards an organic conclusion. I’ll continue spending my time watching those instead of channels run by the financial end of the business.

You’re right. I think maybe I’m just having bad days where I get hypercritical of things and then I see a video that’s just less focused and I make assumptions.

I had assumed earlier on that they were using ai assets for visual aids but had no evidence for that. I didn’t examine any further because that just wouldn’t bother me. But the most recent video on filming solar eclipse has cuts and interactions that were probably just clumsily edited but for some reason I hyper fixated on. The previous one I felt off about was the one about EMV chips. Things like cutting to team members having conversations that recap the thing that was just shown or explained. It’s not proof at all but I thought, hey that’s how generative ai writes.

Op’s video addresses this issue where we’re getting so hypervigilant about ai that I thought I saw it in places where I had no evidence to think it was happening. so I guess that phenomenon is real

They’re private equity. Have been for a while now.
I jumped ship when I found out.