- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
I clicked the link and saw a sales pitch for the person’s book. Also no written description of the impossible ball. It said to buy the book for that. Dunno about rules but I felt spammed.
It’s a YouTube video, there is a high chance it will feature promotional content - which is fine, a good video is hard and often costly to make. If there are no financial incentives or at least ways to reimburse the creators, we could only rely on hobbyist documenting their efforts, which would not fulfill all requests and needs for content.
I would also not expect a written description of the ball in what is clearly meant to be an entertaining video.
That being said, I found the video pretty underwhelming. The ball is still impossible to construct and they get around that by simply constructing a completely different, geometric entity, which also happens to be a promotional feature foe the team making custom soccer balls.
I’m with you that the ratio of actual entertainment and promotional content feels off in the video. The guy was on Adam Savage’s channel a while ago, building some kind of mirror/LED nested cube, which I found a much better introduction to what he is about than this video. Or maybe I don’t actually like the guy that much and Savage canceled that out, who knows.
Well if I look for videos of say Smale’s sphere eversion. I do get a description of what I’m about to see. Otherwise it’s clickbait. I will generally resist clicking those.
This seems a little bit spammy?
How so? I thought it was a fun video, and thought I’d share it. If you think it breaks any community rules, please let me know and/or report the post.