• Vampire [any]
    ·
    2 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.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      2 months ago

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

      • BobDole [none/use name]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 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.

  • Xianshi@lemm.ee
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I watch videos and read articles and use LLMs to give me the key points to grasp the basics. Then build upon that knowledge with more focused learning.

  • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
    ·
    2 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.

  • PaulSmackage [he/him, comrade/them]
    ·
    2 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.

  • Barx [none/use name]
    ·
    2 months ago

    You have to set a goal of what you want to understand and why you want to understand it, then read accordingly. If your goal is to know the usual number of eggs laid by a bird because you are trying to identify one from its nest in your yard, sure just read some Wikipedia and maybe read its sources. If you need to understand a broad topic in the social sciences in order to do your job or organize politically, well sucks yo be you, you need to spend months to years getting a handle on the various schools of thought and approaching them humbly and critically, reading many books.

    • linucs@lemmy.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      2 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
        ·
        edit-2
        2 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.

        Edit: a few days later and I’ve come across the perfect example. Here Tyson explains “the tide doesn’t come in and out”. What I think he should more clearly say is there’s no “high tide” and “low tide”. To me, and I could be an idiot, I thought he was going to explain the action of the waves coming in and out at the cost line every 30 seconds or so. It’s not that he’s wrong but sometimes his choice of words isn’t super on point. Here’s more info about Tidal Range https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/tides.html

        • Vampire [any]
          ·
          2 months ago

          Trying to learn from 'youtubers' seems like asking for trouble.

          Lectures posted on youtube etc. are different I suppose.

  • 10_0@lemmy.ml
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    YouTube, Wikipedia, and asking people I know about it. Send emails and make phone calls to people who might know.