> That's true for most mass market crap but that's a low bar because it's all just escapism in a different format.
Well one could make the same argument for other sources of media.
As far as SNR goes, I think you're overextended there too. A good science video on YouTube can communicate information through diagrams and animations that only textbooks even try, and animations often work better for me than long winded paragraphs of explaining something.
I think arguing whether one spends time reading a book vs watching a YouTube video is a silly exercise. The more important question is what book/video one is reading/watching.
So from the perspective the GP's point that books have a more than deserved reputation for being a better way to spend your time has some validity imo.
Well one could make the same argument for other sources of media.
As far as SNR goes, I think you're overextended there too. A good science video on YouTube can communicate information through diagrams and animations that only textbooks even try, and animations often work better for me than long winded paragraphs of explaining something.
I think arguing whether one spends time reading a book vs watching a YouTube video is a silly exercise. The more important question is what book/video one is reading/watching.
So from the perspective the GP's point that books have a more than deserved reputation for being a better way to spend your time has some validity imo.