Not to be a downer or anything, but I feel like the person who challenged the story wasn't really in the wrong here?
It's not that the story isn't true or the person who reported it isn't who they said it was. It's that, they didn't mention their credentials right off. Now that we're living in an era when misinformation is rife, especially now that some people appear poised to flood us with a sea of LLM-generated shit, citations and backing up your information up front are becoming more important.
People make confident and bold assertions all the time. Some of them will know what they're talking about, but some of them won't, and many times they'll look the same until someone challenges them.
Maybe? We're fighting anecdotes with anecdotes here, there is no way I can examine your statement when it's entirely a friend-of-a-friend memory. I take issue with your "wildly ignorant" statement (of course), and stand by my point. And it's not learning about a discipline, it's the opportunity to learn about it.
Now it's my turn to tell you basically what a lot of people here have already said, but maybe you can get something extra out of this telling.
Everyone who was mega-successful, in old age or young, has had a huge advantage somewhere that people rarely talk about. There are no exceptions to this, only cases where those advantages are lost to time or secrecy. And nearly every time, family wealth is involved in some way. Usually directly, but even if they never got a penny, being in a wealthy family brings you so many casual advantages.
You're comparing yourself to people who were dealt winning hands from the start. Like, a kid who gets a patent at a young age? Someone was coaching them, possibly someone with an agenda. Invents a new plastic? Uh-huh, at what age did they get into polymer chemistry? Who even told them polymer chemistry even existed? There's something else going on there. Don't let the media gaslight you into thinking you're "behind."
It's okay to be you! It's not a race, and even if it was, the people you're comparing yourself to had a gigantic head start.
How about the flash games of Orisinal? They're a bunch of extremely chill tiny games. With the death of internet Flash they're much harder to play, but one can use Ruffle, which has browser extensions for Firefox and Chrome. (Homestar Runner can be viewed that way too.)
Yes, Solar Jetman was terrific! An underrated highlight of the Pickford Bros' output. It's like Gravitar but much less frustrating.
It's not well known, but Rare commissioned ports of it for home computers that were never released. The Commodore 64 version was found and can be downloaded from this page.
RAMPART. An Atari Games arcade game with strong strategy and puzzle elements. Very difficult in the arcade, and has like 12 home ports, including one as late as the PS3. A lot of Atari arcade games from that era aren't talked much about these days, but with Rampart it feels especially egregious.
I could mention lots of games here. I love lots of overlooked games. I even like Athena, of all things, and I am fully aware of its many flaws.
Reddit is too big to die quickly (unless they suffer a catastrophic failure), but it's easy to see that it was an inflection point for them, that it's downhill from here. Remember: at one point, it looked like Yahoo Directory and Internet Explorer would be around forever too.
Also, even if you manage to get the recommendations out off of her front page generally, if one shows up and she clicks on it, it'll start recommending them again. Youtube's recommendation algorithm is really crappy, and assume you're all about the things you watch recently.
The videos you watch on Youtube influence the ones you're recommended. I once put in a couple of 8 hour cat videos for to entertain a feline friend while I was away, and for a while Youtube kept recommending them to me. I had convinced it that I was a cat.
Get her to watch other videos (or even watch them on her behalf using her account), and also mark the awful ones at Not Interested > I Don't Like This Video using the thumbnail menu. It'll take some concerted effort though.
Not to be a downer or anything, but I feel like the person who challenged the story wasn't really in the wrong here?
It's not that the story isn't true or the person who reported it isn't who they said it was. It's that, they didn't mention their credentials right off. Now that we're living in an era when misinformation is rife, especially now that some people appear poised to flood us with a sea of LLM-generated shit, citations and backing up your information up front are becoming more important.
People make confident and bold assertions all the time. Some of them will know what they're talking about, but some of them won't, and many times they'll look the same until someone challenges them.
Well, that's how I see it anyway.