• RealFknNito@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    “First, we start by breaking down the chemicals on the exterior. I couldn’t use hydrofluoric acid because I didn’t have a good way to filter that out and I don’t really want anything corrosive in my candies. I looked online for alternatives and found a couple like isocyanatomethane. Thankfully because I’m a registered chemist these searches don’t put me on a government watchlist anymore.”

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I’m gonna be honest, he had some interesting videos at first, but I couldn’t freaking stand his voice. Now that his shit has started to become more and more sensationalist and catering to the masses, I’m over it.

      lol the down votes. Let’s have a discussion? I’m simply voicing an opinion. 😄

      • crypticthree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Explosions and Fire is better. Sure he took four years to make the world’s shittiest cubane, but his despair is quite entertaining

        • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          NurdRage is the best. He’s the OG YouTube chemist, and he’s actually done some original research in his videos, like pioneering the alcohol-catalyzed magnesium reduction process for making sodium metal. Thanks to him, sodium metal can now be made without a high-temperature electrolysis apparatus.

      • blargerer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Which of his videos do you think are overly sensationalised? You need to follow the whims of the algorithm to some degree to survive, but I think most of his videos are fine, maybe with a slightly clickbaity title or thumbnail, but that’s to be expected these days.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          A lot of them are just goofy and not really as educational as they used to be, in my opinion.

          I don’t support being click baity for the algorithm. For me it’s about the integrity. I won’t support it, not from the algorithm nor the creator(s).

          Only some creators that I’ve been with a long time that I know the content is good will I still stay subbed after they turn click baity.

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              That may be. Still can’t stand the voice, so I’m nopeing out regardless. Seems to be a sensitive topic/unpopular opinion, this. lol

              • 𝕯𝖎𝖕𝖘𝖍𝖎𝖙@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                It’s not a sensitive topic so much as it’s a little strange (at least to me) that anyone would avoid watching (what I think are) genuinely fascinating experiments (to me, a programmer, not a chemist or scientist) just because of the sound of someone’s voice.

                It’s understandable because folks have their own issues with things that get on their nerves. I just think it’s a little unfortunate because he’s got some great videos but to each thier own. I know that as a programmer, I can’t stand the style some other programmers have in their youtube videos so the same could be said about me - too bad since I am probably missing out on some good content but if you can’t enjoy the format, you can’t enjoy the content.

                • Victor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Yeah I mean I fully agree, I might be missing out, but at the same time it’s just entertainment in the end. I need to be enjoying it. Anything he puts out, I’m not gonna be utilizing in my daily life, so it’s not like it’s essential that I watch. Hasn’t been so far, probably won’t be in the future. So yeah, if I don’t enjoy it, for whatever reason, I should stop watching. 🤷‍♂️ Pretty simple.

                  People might not agree with the voice but it’s my personal gripe I guess.

      • Sertou@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        My problem with him is that he lacks rigor and his methodology is poor.

        Also, from the amount of money he throws around buying equipment, I suspect he has wealthy parents bankrolling him.

        Applied Science is a far more interesting youtube channel.

          • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            Not gonna lie that’s the channel I head to when I’ve run out of Nilered content. Been following his Cubane synthesis for a while now and it’s been a crazy ride.

        • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago
          1. No, look back at his older videos when he was working out of the garage. Not rich. Decently off but most of the equipment is donated or paid for with channel income.

          2. It’s ok to enjoy many different sources of chemistry content.

        • Objects in Space@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          My opinion of course but he’s not going for methodology or hard science. He’s doing fun chemistry stuff in a way that lets me watch and understand with zero understanding of chemistry.

          Sometimes things can be for fun and he doesn’t need to get published for turning lunar dust back into swiss cheese.

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Depends what you’re into. People down voting others for expressing their opinion is just stupid. You’re entitled to liking it, we’re entitled to not like it. (I’m not saying you’re the one who was down voting, of course.)

        • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          He’s always been transparent about the fact that his parents helped him get started, and he’s been financially operating on his own for years. Many of his videos are every bit as rigorous as Applied Science.

          • Sertou@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Re: transparency about bankrolling, i believe you since you say so. I’ve seen many of his videos and never heard him say so. I guess I just missed the ones where he did, or perhaps he said so on social media.

            As for rigor, I can’t count the number of times he uses an unspecified amount of a chemical in a reaction, referring only to “throwing a bunch in.” But again, perhaps I’ve just watched the wrong videos.

            His approach seems to me to be very “by guess and by gosh.” Part of that stems from trying to follow poorly written instructions in an academic paper; applied sciences grapples with that too. And some of it may be less slapdash that it appears, with Nilered using a deliberately casual tone in his scripts so that they’re more relatable, knowing that people aren’t likely to use his videos to attempt to reproduce his results. Even taking that into account though, given the number of attempts it often takes him to get the desired result, I doubt his rigor. Props to him for showing the failures and partial successes, though. And whatever else I say about him, I do generally find him entertaining.

            • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              You’re watching the wrong videos. A lot of his material manufacturing videos tend to have a lot more trial and error. In the more pure chemical extraction or synthesis videos, he’s hyper precise about amounts, timing, temperatures, and safety. In others he’s definitely in “making a funny video fucking around mode.”

  • Sagrotan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    In starting a chemistry YouTube channel, call it “mummy brown” and dissolve shit in different shit as long as it takes to become literal shit. Business model yes or no?