4 ms·
Theirs was definitely shot-off in The Great War. The only plausible excuses for not reading would be disabilities such as reading (lexical / comprehension) and/
by airhead969 6y ago
Theirs was definitely shot-off in The Great War. The only plausible excuses for not reading would be disabilities such as reading (lexical / comprehension) and/or attention. Dyslexia would be a tough one, as well as severe ADHD. I happen to have the latter but still forcibly plow through books.
It is good to have well-constructed readers to summarize and discuss implications of subject matter, but not as primary material, only to ensure mastery of it.
- RivieraKid 6y agoIt wasn't, I read a lot, I just think it's really stupid and suboptimal to limit your learning and information consumption strategy to either fully reading (or skimming) long texts or ignoring them. I mean, why not spend <1 minute reading a TL;DR when it can sometimes give you most of the value and if not, provide you with information whether it's worth reading the whole thing. It seems like a good deal, why avoid it? I'd rather spend my time reading stuff thay has a higher expected value (e.g. a book about macroeconomics with great reviews if I'm interested in that topic) rather than random long texts on HN that can turn out to be complete garbage.
- justin66 6y agoEnglebart’s is a pretty good example of work you’ll want to spend some time exploring on your own if you can, simply because it’s important and you shouldn’t fully trust a typical summary of his ideas. For example, plenty of people watch the demo I mentioned above and spend all their time marveling at the invention of the mouse, or some other detail of the hardware, rather than taking in what was really being explored by the users of the hardware in terms of human/computer and human/human interaction.