A Brief History of Semiconductor Packaging [video]
youtube.com
youtube.com
He’s not a professional academic, so it doesn’t need to be a written like a phd dissertation. But as a ratio of entertainment/information, these videos are fantastic.
This channel is unparallelled
On the other hand if you look at the comments he's inspiring a few people to go into this field and many people who wouldn't engage with these topics at all otherwise, do. And these two groups don't care about the mistakes either, one doesn't really need to, the other will actually learn the stuff anyway. So I guess this makes him a net positive, even if his conduct as a "youtube creator" is rather disgusting (which is pretty much par for the course on that site obviously).
Idk what your background is, but if I had to guess you did research for a financial firm that sold memos or a were a consultant.
Information you present seems high quality and it may all be available on the internet, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you had to talk to people offline because it’s not just on wikipedia.
All this to say, I fucking love your channel because it is well-researched. Honestly in my first read of GP’s comment, I was expecting him to critique our academic institutions for being unable to reward such content.
I think that rather than trying to be perfect, it's much more important that you continue to make videos in a way that is sustainable for you. Like, if you make perfectly sourced videos but only ever have the time and energy for 3 more then that's on the whole a loss compared to whatever you were going to do anyway.
Anyways, it's very late, hope that made sense. Love the videos
Thanks for an enjoyable and informative episode!
I enjoy your videos and always look forward to watching them. I've actually learned quite a bit from you about fabs and lithography. I've never been in a fab and most of the theory I learned was in the 1990's. I meet DRC rules for stuff like double and quad pattering in 20/14/10nm but the industry is so segmented that I never see the actual challenges that lithography engineers run in to and how EUV has helped.
Anyway, keep up the good work, everyone can always get better, but I would the ignore the overly negative comments
Two examples in this video: you are talking about SOIC and it's gull-wing leads while showing picture of SOJ package, which does not have gull-wing leads. You are talking about flat packs in military missile guidance systems and the image is of a board from AGC.
Content-wise, the second example leads to question of why you did not mention the AGC in the video at all. Another such weird ommision is mentioning IBM in the context of PGA, but without any mention of SLT. As an hybrid process it might look irrelevant for "true IC" packaging, but the SLT paper (https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1147/rd.82.0102 finding full-text for free on the internet is somewhat hard, but it certainly exists somewhere) contains many ideas that are used in SMT and modern packaging technologies.
It feels to me that your process is writing the voice over first and then somehow coming up with the pictures/video. That gives the videos this distinct feeling of being very low-effort, regardless of how much effort you actually put into researching and writing the content itself. This is something you probably want to work on.
Keep up the good work.
Also, I think the comment qualifies as a "shallow dismissal of others' work", which is discouraged by HN rules.
I graduated from one of the top EE schools in the world a couple of decades ago but focused on CS. I've used sites like Anandtech, EETimes and Semi Engineering to keep up, but your videos have largely replaced that for me because they are engaging, well-researched, and branch out into other relevant areas like the various important economics and technology history topics that the industry sites never cover. I also like your levity, it's hard to read/watch someone who takes themselves too seriously.
I have absolutely no doubt that you're having a substantial impact on an audience of younger people around the world, who may not know why they should be interested in EE. Larger than many academics who profess that as their job. Which is especially important to us in the US now that we've decided to onshore a bunch of that. So thank you.
Why is this even on one of your hands? It's not a scientific paper, it's not a product he's selling, it's an informative youtube video. Whining about a youtube video not citing sources because it's not a valid classroom project makes as much sense as complaining that it's in English so you couldn't air it on Telemundo. It's completely irrelevant. If you're talking to someone and he tells you an interesting story do you go "Oh that was really cool, but you didn't tell me exactly where you learned all the details of the story, so that really detracted from my experience of listening to you"?
If you compare a paper published in a conference's proceedings with the corresponding oral presentation (which is what his videos are) there tends to be a difference. The worst presentations are those that try to copy/paste the paper into PowerPoint resulting in walls of text and those are the most likely to have a references slide.
The ad for the newsletter is very reasonable for the venue (Youtube) and if it would be unacceptable in a different context, like showing the videos in a classroom, that is not the author's fault.