Earlier quoted context omitted.
pikuma.com
How are the videos served?
wistia.com
Coursera to combine with Udemy
311–320 of 395 posts
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, you're definitely not wrong. We see it all the time on GitHub. If a project hasn't gotten a new commit in 2 days then the project is claimed dead. The same thing with blogs in general. A post could be popular and ranked highly in 2020 but in 2025 it's not even ranked on a search engine, even if the content is still highly relevant and fully working. It's bad because you could have a 10+ year old site with 500+ p…
> If a project hasn't gotten a new commit in 2 days then the project is claimed dead. That is certainly true, those projects are effectively dead. They lack security updates, lack integrations with new platforms, lack support for new HW architectures, lack newer privacy guarantees, etc., etc.
TCL/Tk 8.6, AWK, tons of shells, SDL2 versions, OpenMotif releases frozen in time...
As they stated, tons of 'renewed' stuff are snake oil today. They add nothing new.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#313It’s remarkable to me that a major new competitor in online distributed learning hasn’t already happened, considering the obvious LLM application. But this press release makes me sad. At one point both of these companies had big visions for how online learning should happen. To read the announcement, it sounds like they’re being held hostage by a management consultant. There is so much gobbledigook and so little clar…
Yeah ditto. I don't know when it happened, but the Coursera courses I tried at first (around 2012 I think?) were very high quality -- I thought it was clearly a competitor to traditional brick and mortar. Then a few years later, checked it out and there were thousands of courses, many clearly without as much thought or effort. I am not as familiar with the other online schools that focus on quality (like WGU). I am s…
> Then a few years later, checked it out and there were thousands of courses, many clearly without as much thought or effort.
Thousands, and no decent way of separating the wheat from the chaff. Their filtering options suck. I'm also a bit disappointed that (most? all?) of their courses don't feature interactive exercises the way Khan Academy does. I mean I get they started out as basically a repository of recorded lectures, but i.e. a Linear Algebra course is pointless without practicing problems. A few overly simplistic multiple choice questions are the "best" I've seen on on Coursera.
Mean while their prices seem to go up every year.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Certainly that depends on the nature of the software. For instance, I don't expect some header-only library that does what it's supposed to do to ever need updating. If it's a headers-only library in a language such as C++, if the project is not dead then the very least anyone would expect from it is being updated to support any of the modern C++ versions. Also, if the project is actively maintained then there is a…
> If it's a headers-only library in a language such as C++, if the project is not dead then the very least anyone would expect from it is being updated to support any of the modern C++ versions. Did I miss a new C++ version released <2 days ago perhaps?
> Did I miss a new C++ version released You certainly are missing something. C++26 was officially released 4 months ago, and support is slowly being rolled out to compilers and packages.
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support/26.html
If you somehow believe this kind of work is done in a couple of days, that's a good way to explain to the world how oblivious you are about the topic you are discussing.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a project hasn't gotten a new commit in 2 days then the project is claimed dead. That is certainly true, those projects are effectively dead. They lack security updates, lack integrations with new platforms, lack support for new HW architectures, lack newer privacy guarantees, etc., etc.
That's what I'd expect if I see a project with no commits in 2 years. Not 2 days.
There's ton of perfectly usable 2-years old software.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#316I was a Udemy instructor for ~10 years selling tech courses but focused more on delivering courses through my own site for the last ~5-6 years. Something never felt right with how Udemy promoted courses. I used to have a top selling course there, selling thousands of copies a month and now it gets basically no sales but it's still one of the highest rated courses in that niche on their platform. It's just no longer r…
I've been bamboozled by Udemy a couple of times, thinking a course was recently made, only to discover the videos were 10 years old and most of the content was woefully out of date, with a few "recent updates" videos tacked on at the end.
Whether this is a problem obviously depends heavily on the subject. Classical CompSci problems won't suffer from this, depth first search is still depth first search ten years later. But the framework-du-jour is often a different beast entirely 10 years down the road.
Perhaps they simply have too much content to be able to curate things properly.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If a project hasn't gotten a new commit in 2 days then the project is claimed dead. That is certainly true, those projects are effectively dead. They lack security updates, lack integrations with new platforms, lack support for new HW architectures, lack newer privacy guarantees, etc., etc.
> They lack security updates Very few projects update dependencies that often, and only very big ones are found with security issues that often. > lack integrations with new platforms You don't need a new intration _every 2 days_, not to mention that many projects don't need such integrations at all. Moreover some popular and updated projects lack such integrations despite having lot of commits. > lack support for ne…
People who are earnestly engaging with their point have assumed “two days” was hyperbole so that they can instead respond to the greater idea, yet you have not: you’re stuck on an unserious detail like it’s the lynchpin of their claim.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
Turns out that an online certificate isn't worth anything when layoffs happen and the market is oversaturated with people who have real degrees. MOOCs have their place, but it's a very narrow set of disciplines.
I work at a university and half of the coursework seems worse than the good MOOCs. Esp. the more practical ones. (Might be a problem of that university, still ...)
Well, I work at a university too. At least in biomedicine, every MOOC is extremely shallow. The most advanced MOOC is an introductory-level when compared to the university courses.
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
Turns out that an online certificate isn't worth anything when layoffs happen and the market is oversaturated with people who have real degrees. MOOCs have their place, but it's a very narrow set of disciplines.
Just wait until you find out that real degrees also aren't worth anything anymore
It's not a question whether they are or not worth something. It's just that it's a much more meaningful differentiator when there's an overabundance of talent. CVs are going to be filtered based on something. And people with no degree are going to have a much more difficult time getting through the automated screening. That will come as a surprise to people who were promised they'll get a job by paying $1000 for a "nano-degree".
Re: Coursera to combine with Udemy
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
How accessible is the course now?
How is malicious compliance the fault of someone who asks for disability accomodations? It is unfortunate that the ADA is designed so that the only mechanism of enforcement of disability rights is lawsuits. :-\ Maybe there should be some exceptions around things provided on a "best-effort" basis, if they can be very carefully crafted.
Many interest groups in the US are for hire. Meaning, if you don't like a piece of upcoming legislation, you can give them a donation and they'll find out a way the upcoming legislation hurts their demographic. These groups have overwhelmingly passive members, who don't run the organization in any meaningful way.
There are even more mercenary groups, whose business model is basically extorting organizations for donations, threatening with expensive lawsuits and bad publicity.
It seems pretty likely to me that NAD's lawsuits are more about this, and less about actually caring about deaf access. There are a lot of them, and they seem to go for big pockets. Probably the efforts Berkeley went to to offer accessibility would have been deemed good enough to not sue over (for now) if they had donated.
It doesn't mean the causes such orgs ostensibly fight for aren't good. It's just that when enforcement is by lawsuit, it's inevitably selective enforcement, and that just creates a huge business opportunity for unscrupulous lawyers (which there is no shortage of).