+1. I do a lot of videos, especially now that COVID has put the kibosh on in-person conferences and everything is pre-recorded. I usually need 3 takes to do a decent talk recording and that assumes substantial prep to lay out the story line. Anything less is a meandering mess.

It's way easier just to write a decent README.md.

Why not both?

What does the video add that the readme doesn't do?

Honest response:

Wonderful documentation is hard to beat from my learning perspective, but I find that level of quality is more rare.

Therefore, I learn better by watching something materialize on video at ~3x speed and often without any speaking.

I think it simply boils down to my level of trust that this person didn’t accidentally omit anything from their article or blog post or whatever and what I see on the screen is what I get. Now, that doesn’t fix when tools change etc, but videos instill a higher level of trust that, if I follow these steps, I will produce this output.

Segues to sponsors and screamed content as attempts to keep your attention and to prevent you from falling asleep.

Paircast automatically transcribe the video's audio to text.

Yes, but then you only have the video's audio but miss out on the actual code being written, meaning you lose a lot of context.

It also records the code being written.

If the text-only experience is good enough, then why bother with encoding and storing a video?

Books are pretty good, why bother with movies?

Although I agree with you, this comment is missing the mark. Books and films are two fundamentally different mediums and have two different audiences, while this is more about supplementing the text version of something with audio/video.

I think that an audio (or video) version would be superior, but more because, assuming there are captions, the audio might be able to describe something beyond the code alone more easily than typing out a note would.

It takes lots and lots of effort to turns books into movies and vice versa.

You don't just take a transcript of the dialogue in the movie to make a book.

It claims you can git checkout code from any point of the lecture/cast

The git commit hash is included at the top of every diff in the transcript. You can `git checkout [the hash]` to get the code at that point.

Ok, that’s actually awesome!

Majority of coders can see the screen so as a mvp this would be great for those users.

Doesn’t this depend on how well the videos are transcribed? I imagine for some people it’s way easier and faster to record a video than to type.

No joke, I saw a comment in my code base literally yesterday written from a week ago. I said this is crap and it's taking me more than 5seconds to understand and I ended up simply changing some variable names and refactor the function. It took maybe 2 minutes to do but now I don't need a comment and it's cleaner code for future changes. (It's in a file we are actively working on and WILL change)

tl;dr: Refactor not comment

Ideally the code should describe what you are doing and how you are doing it.

You might need comments to describe why you are doing something. And you definitely need comments for why you are _not_ doing something else.

in today's world - you either watch a pre-recorded video or a live zoom call. there's no third option.