Sciencemadness Discussion Board

NileRed in the NY Times

AvBaeyer - 19-8-2024 at 18:42

There was a very long article about NileRed in the NY Times this past Sunday (August 18, 2024). I thought it would be nice to bring this to everyone's attention. What an operation he has!

AvB

j_sum1 - 19-8-2024 at 20:28

Here is the link.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/17/world/canada/nilered-yout...

paulll - 19-8-2024 at 20:45

As much as I have a ton of respect for NileRed, seeing Nigel repeatedly referred to as, "Mr. Braun," is amusingly dissonant.

Tdep - 20-8-2024 at 17:52

Here’s a non-paywall version you can read for free if you can’t get in to the above version: https://archive.md/6PTyM
Very cool article!

Sir_Gawain - 20-8-2024 at 20:27

That’s awesome, but for most of us, ending up in the news is our biggest fear :)

j_sum1 - 21-8-2024 at 02:45

I admit to enjoying early Nilered a lot more than recent Nilered.
Those days when he tinkered in his garage and did not show his face were good science.
The ultra-equipped lab with the drawer of specialist hammers and the spectroscope that has been used twice and the reaction shots of burning diamonds or eating capsasin hold less appeal.
I think he has been extremely clever to read the market and carve a space where he makes money dojng stuff he loves. Respect for that. But ultimately, I think it is of lesser value even if it has wide appeal.

woelen - 21-8-2024 at 04:34

I agree.

The problem is that true (and more abstract and academic) science does not sell as well as commercialized science.
A video about e.g. a specific redx-reaction, complete with reaction equations and explanations of underlying principles can be very well made, but still, the big public does not like it that much. Too abstract, too many hard to understand words, too many difficult words, and so on.

The population of members of sciencemadness is far from the average person, watching videos on Youtube. Taking that into account, I still have big respect for what NileRed achieved, even with his somewhat less interesting videos for sciencemadness-people. Actually, I think that there also are quite a few people on sciencemadness, who also like the somewhat less hard science videos.

Precipitates - 21-8-2024 at 18:14

He has swayed away from home science to more specialist techniques and procedures, on more popular topics. The more successful he becomes, the less he will want to tell people how to make dangerous chemicals (it probably doesn't sell well to YouTube and his sponsors), and indeed now he condemns some of his earlier experiments. I guess it's easy to say how bad making bromine in your garage is if you have a fancy lab to do it in. Not jealous at all! ;)

So, with that in mind, whilst I enjoy watching his latest videos from time to time, his earlier works are much more relevant to me. Sure, I could find the information elsewhere, but the visual aspect is so useful, and even his older videos are detailed and edited well.

I'm very happy for him that he has achieved such success, which, along with such articles, hopefully spins a more positive and lighter tone on chemistry in general.

And I'm sure many home chemists would aspire to have such success.

pantone159 - 21-8-2024 at 18:53

Here is a 'gift' link from the NY Times that is supposed to get past any paywall:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/17/world/canada/nilered-yout...

Keras - 21-8-2024 at 23:23

Thanks for the link.

I tend to agree with everyone. As soon as he began to make 'shorts' in order to earn more money, his channel's relevance fell down considerably to me. Fortunately, both NurdRage and recently Apoptosis still carry the torch.

Worse, I think that his recent videos are completely anti-didactical. There is an underlying message in ‘garage’ videos that interesting science doesn’t need a lot of means. With maybe $200 worth of glassware and reactants, you can begin doing nice things. See people who make tunnel-effect microscopes at home. NileRed's last videos, on the contrary, tend to spread the message that in order to have fun you need super expensive multi-thousand dollars professional equipment which is forever out of reach of the common person.

But finally what I hate most in this article is (apparently his) final line: ‘Science is only interesting because it’s useful,’ Mr. Braun said. ‘If it’s not useful, it’s just a bunch of party tricks.’ This is completely antipodal to what I believe. Science is interesting because it makes you aware how the world works, and because of what you discover. In Nile Red's vision, there would be no point in investigating black holes or going bonkers to explore Mars or other planets, let alone particle accelerators, etc. I find it cool to synthesise a molecule just because it smells nice or has a beautiful colour or, like Apoptosis, just watch crystals of potassium chlorate form, sparkle and fall to the bottom of a beaker. Nile Red's vision has become totally capitalistic, which is why I dropped out of his Patreon supporters long ago.

[Edited on 22-8-2024 by Keras]

woelen - 21-8-2024 at 23:40

It depends on how Mr. Braun defines 'useful'. If this is meant to be interpreted as economically useful, then I fully agree with you. Science, however, can also be 'useful' in other ways, just like art, music, stories, etc. It can be beautiful, awe inspiring, interesting, etc. To me, these also are important measures of usefulness. And for me, doing home science is mainly driven by that kind of usefulness, This is true for my chemistry things, but also for the mathematics I am doing more recently.

Keras - 21-8-2024 at 23:50

Quote: Originally posted by woelen  
It depends on how Mr. Braun defines 'useful'. If this is meant to be interpreted as economically useful, then I fully agree with you. Science, however, can also be 'useful' in other ways, just like art, music, stories, etc. It can be beautiful, awe inspiring, interesting, etc. To me, these also are important measures of usefulness. And for me, doing home science is mainly driven by that kind of usefulness, This is true for my chemistry things, but also for the mathematics I am doing more recently.


You’re right. I took the opposition between 'useful' and 'bunch of tricks' as an indication that he meant 'useful' in a rather narrow way, and discarded all the aesthetically appealing aspects as junk.

Precipitates - 22-8-2024 at 06:56

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  


Science is only interesting because it’s useful,’ Mr. Braun said. ‘If it’s not useful, it’s just a bunch of party tricks.’

[Edited on 22-8-2024 by Keras]


To me his latest videos seem very much like party tricks e.g.,. turning styrofoam into candy, paint thinner into cherry soda.

I'm not sure I would want to go to one of his parties! :D

But, I guess as long as he explains the science, it's not just party tricks.

Keras - 22-8-2024 at 09:08

Quote: Originally posted by Precipitates  
Quote: Originally posted by Keras  


Science is only interesting because it’s useful,’ Mr. Braun said. ‘If it’s not useful, it’s just a bunch of party tricks.’

[Edited on 22-8-2024 by Keras]


To me his latest videos seem very much like party tricks e.g.,. turning styrofoam into candy, paint thinner into cherry soda.


Yeah, I agree with that. He has been steadily turning to the spectacular and the clic-baity to attract more subscribers…

j_sum1 - 22-8-2024 at 14:07

I don't think this is a good moment to pile on NileRed.
I think there is general consensus about his work and his marketing strategy. What he is doing seems to be the thing he wants to do and is working very well for him. And there are some ambitious projects underneath all the fluff.

What I do think is awesome is a decent, detailed article from a prominent media outfit supporting amateur chemistry. That does not happen often.

teodor - 23-8-2024 at 00:32

Amateur chemistry and success from the public's point of view. A complex topic with a bit of controversy.
But somebody have to do a job of making society not afraid of amateur chemistry.
The problem when other creators of very good youtube videos about chemistry try to compete with such sort of production. Because they see it is succesfull. But from consumer's point of view it is more interesting to see videos from people showing their own interests, not from people trying to guess what is more intrresting for the public.

Keras - 23-8-2024 at 01:45

Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  

What I do think is awesome is a decent, detailed article from a prominent media outfit supporting amateur chemistry. That does not happen often.


The problem is that I don’t really see any reference to amateur chemistry in the article, especially since it is mentioned that NileRed is now a family company churning up millions of dollars.

j_sum1 - 23-8-2024 at 04:12

Well, it did mention he started in his Dad's garage, scavenging glassware from a college skip.

Keras - 23-8-2024 at 09:07

Quote: Originally posted by j_sum1  
Well, it did mention he started in his Dad's garage, scavenging glassware from a college skip.


Maybe, but he never acknowledges the other people in the community, even those like Chemplayer or NurdRage he took inspiration from.

Texium - 23-8-2024 at 10:47

I agree with Keras to the extent that the article makes it sound like his transformation from playing in the garage to having a hugely successful channel occurred in a vacuum. I’m not going to get too down about it, but it would have been nice for Sciencemadness and other YouTubers to get a little shoutout. He was even in the Sciencemadness Skype Group for a while, and we would discuss his projects and share ideas. While his personal ambition and talent for excellent camerawork were the major factors of his success, it does feel a little disingenuous to ignore the support of our community.

Like j_sum though, I am mainly happy that he is successful and getting good press. Though his new videos don’t appeal to me, it is nice to see that a science channel can be so popular with the general public. Better watching NileRed than absolutely valueless reality TV. Perhaps for some who have never really thought about chemistry, it can be a gateway to content with more intellectual value as their curiosity takes hold.

metalresearcher - 23-8-2024 at 11:54

I was indeed less interested in his videos since his shorts, but the purple gold video is very interesting, but that is because I am interested in metallurgy and do metalcasting.
Yes, commercial science, but guys like Sir Humphrey Davy, Henri Moissan or Priestley also started as a kind of hobby chemists but did a lot for science and technology.

bnull - 23-8-2024 at 14:53

It is good to see amateur science being presented in a light other than the "dangers and threats of cookery/bomb-making" that the media usually does and loves. The "Mr. Braun" routine, that was quite annoying.

The last time I watched one of his videos was the one on thioacetone. I lost interest in all that came afterwards (especially the shorts; I wish there was a way to disable that feature in the app). I suppose I'm still subscribed.

Neal - 24-8-2024 at 03:04

Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
‘Science is only interesting because it’s useful,’ Mr. Braun said. ‘If it’s not useful, it’s just a bunch of party tricks.’ This is completely antipodal to what I believe. Science is interesting because it makes you aware how the world works, and because of what you discover.

Well here's something from an incel perspective: science is only interesting or useful when it can attract women. Otherwise, it is useless and competes with other things that can do better.

CouchHatter - 24-8-2024 at 18:27

science is the only woman for me. lol

Yeah pantone159, thanks for that link around the paywall! A very interesting read. I still enjoy his content, but it usually just reminds me how neglected my own lab is these days.
Quote: Originally posted by bnull  
... I lost interest in all that came afterwards (especially the shorts; I wish there was a way to disable that feature in the app)...

if you're using iOS, there may be a way to disable that 'feature'. Makes YT way better.

Texium - 24-8-2024 at 20:33

Quote: Originally posted by Neal  
Quote: Originally posted by Keras  
‘Science is only interesting because it’s useful,’ Mr. Braun said. ‘If it’s not useful, it’s just a bunch of party tricks.’ This is completely antipodal to what I believe. Science is interesting because it makes you aware how the world works, and because of what you discover.

Well here's something from an incel perspective: science is only interesting or useful when it can attract women. Otherwise, it is useless and competes with other things that can do better.
cringe

Sir_Gawain - 25-8-2024 at 10:58

Nigel talks about being on Sciencemadness in this clip. He’s also mentioned it in older videos.

bnull - 25-8-2024 at 14:08

@CouchHatter: I'm not that lucky (Android user here). But thanks anyway.
Quote:
science is only interesting or useful when it can attract women. Otherwise, it is useless and competes with other things that can do better.

If you think you can attract women with science, give up. You can use science to undress Nature; you can't do the same to women.

Precipitates - 25-8-2024 at 18:39

It may attract some people (women or men), from a gender neutral perspective, but that is hardly the point.

There is more to life than just trying to attract members of the opposite sex.

Quote: Originally posted by Sir_Gawain  
Nigel talks about being on Sciencemadness in this clip. He’s also mentioned it in older videos.


I wouldn't see that as an overly positive reference, but I haven't seen the other videos.

Definitely true though, I wouldn't feel comfortable doing the chemistry I do here in another country e.g.,. UK, where the purchase of chemicals is so restricted.