The correct comparison would include the effect size on language learning of using Duolingo instead of scrolling through cat videos. The effect size appears to be close to zero. And without considering in the analysis the long-term negative effects on the self-perceived ability to learn a language after spending hundreds of hours using Duolingo and being able to simply say "Hola" in Spanish, which may make the use of Duolingo a net negative on lifetime language learning.
But, yes, I used a hyperbole, it is a classic tool of rhetoric. I could have said that they just learn how to ask for a coffee, or the directions for the Eiffel Tower. The meaning is the same.
Can a person find a way to waste hundred hours on Duolingo? Sure. I got perilously close :). But after a tenth of that I could generate sentences for friendly emails and at beginning meetings etc when I actually tried to learn.
Has the "100 hrs and not gotten beyond hola" been your personal experience or somebody you know? Trying to understand if I'm arguing with a strawman / straw scenario, or actual occurrence. If latter I'd be genuinely extremely curious to hear a lot more! What were the 100hrs spent on?
But among the people (about 20) who have told me they have used Duolingo to (try to) learn my native language, I have yet to find one who can say more than a few disconnected words. And among the people I have seen who are fluent in my native language or the other languages I speak, I have yet to find anyone who said they used Duolingo to learn that language. Am I extrapolating too much? I think the sample size was pretty good.
Based on this statement it seems like you've never used Duolingo.
I have a 297 day streak right now and I just feel like slave to the owl. I’m going to get to 365 and then purposely break the streak to free myself.
Why do you even care? It's an artificial count by a for-profit company with an Owl logo that doesn't even know you exist outside of a few database rows.
You've just self-described it as slavery, why would you keep doing this to yourself?
It's kind of like telling a smoker to just quit because it's the smoking company who benefits. Yeah, sure, but the addiction is internal. They're not just selflessly smoking to help Philip Morris.
#downvoteInApproach :)
Nobody has yet shown me a flawless proof that they themselves exist, or anything else, and yet somehow, I manage to get through my days just fine based on the versions of things in my mind that correspond to the empirical phenomena that I experience. And occasionally those mental constructs change with new empirical data even.
The GP's comment was that they were effectively 'slave' to a skinner box, and even recognized it. And yet, refusal to do anything about it.
I see it again and again. The answers are there, and a bit harder, but yeah.
I mean, I literally said in the same post what I was going to do about it. I'm ending it on my own terms when I'm satisfied with my own progress.
After a year the milestones become less meaningful (400 days? 500? 700? meh) yet harder and harder to break the longer you go. A friend recently hit 1000 days in Duolingo--really hard to give up once you've gone that far.
Lots of people harness this for their own good with streaks for things that are really actually valuable for them.
I don't like being nitpicky, but if we're going to argue about the "correct usage" and not accept colloquial usage has perverted the term, I may as well set the record straight:
>a person who is forced to work for and obey another and is considered to be their property; an enslaved person.
No, it is actually completely correct. But for the sake of playing this fun game of being "Technically right" here's also a dictionary definition:
Slave noun:
"a person entirely under the domination of some influence or person:"
She was a slave to her own ambition.
>>and not accept colloquial usage has perverted the term
No such thing has happened, words can have both literal and figurative meaning.
fair enough, I thought that definition was unofficial or marked as slang.
>No such thing has happened, words can have both literal and figurative meaning.
yes, like "literally" having the definition of "figuratively". I would indeed call that a perversion:
>to divert to a wrong end or purpose
most of the time that is at best marked as slang (such as use of a double negative to mean a negative, and not a soft positive), but I guess that's not my call to make.
Thankfully I got out of it and am much more consciously breaking streaks.
The downside is that I've clearly been exercising a lot less since I stopped focusing on the streak, so it works in some ways…
We should have a way to adjust what we consider a streak: maybe a daily streak is important to you, but maybe 3 times a week is what matters to you. Having the option for each app would be great.
I know people who have done Duo Lingo for years. I was shocked when I saw how bad their language skills were.
It's best treated as reading some motivational quote in the morning. Gets you out of bed and into the mood but it won't carry you through life alone. Is that worth $10/month? Depends on the person, but it would be for me if I was being serious.
Anyhow, when it tells me it’s sad, or it misses me, it makes me actually avoid the app. It’s so stupid and annoying as all hell.
I just hope I'm not learning wrong things from the new AI-powered checker. It's bad enough that I can't always find an explanation why I got something wrong. (I've actually used ChatGPT 3.0 to explain some of my mistakes, and then was able to verify its explanation because of the keywords it used, and then googling those.)
Not sure about the AI checker yet; we'll see! I've used ChatGPT myself though as a wonderful language tutor to complement Duolingo, so I'm trying to not be completely skeptical / cynical :-)
https://www.reddit.com/r/duolingo/comments/ulj7pa/psa_you_ca...
One thing that I deem a falacy though, is comparing it with e.g. an expensive paid for classroom or personal lessons. It may well fail in such direct comparison, and no surprise!
People then use that comparison to claim "it's worthless", and I disagree with that.
If the claim is "30min of structured learning with duolingo will get you no closer to learning a language than 30 min of mindlessly scrolling facebook cat videos", I don't believe that's true. And THAT is the correct comparison :)
One thing to note though, is how you use it - note I used the term "structured learning" in previous sentence, not "doing match madness for points" :)
Personally, I spent first few months learning on duolingo, and it was wonderful; had some small chats with people who speak that language at work, occasionally wrote a sentence or two in that language in emails, etc. Then I spent next few months preserving the streak. I did the challenges and matches and got thousands of points and first places... but learned nothing. In fact, my knowledge deteriorated.
Then after 200 days, I lost my streak and... breathed a sigh of relief. I am now making sure I do the lessons and practice and learn, and purposely avoid the competition part of it or activities which give many repetitive points but don't increase my knowledge. My familiarity with language is increasing again and I can make more and more sentences on my own.