5 ms·

> I got a copy of the detailed descriptions of the Xbox 360 CPU and I read it through multiple times This way of learning is not taught often enough, we learn

> I got a copy of the detailed descriptions of the Xbox 360 CPU and I read it through multiple times This way of learning is not taught often enough, we learn it in school when learning another language (e.g. repeating words over and over). But in sciences and engineering the repeated reading of the material is not usually encouraged or talked about. It would be interesting to see what the material was, it's not linked, but it must have been really detailed.

bostonsre 5y ago
I think it depends alot on your rate of digestion (or understanding? can't find the right word...) of a piece of material. Being dropped in an alien book can make it tough to grasp everything on first pass. If you already have a lot of knowledge that links to the topics being discussed it is a lot easier to grok it in one pass.
foobarian 5y ago
Specifically for CPU manuals, detailed reading used to pay off especially back when every cycle counted. You would spend days rereading tucked away sections describing some weird extension or edge case hoping to harness it for your game/program and get more speed out of it.
Tepix 5y ago
I used to read a lot of books when learning about computer science topics. I'm sure i've read the Camel book at least 4 times over several years. A well written book like that can really do much more than just provide a reference. A lot of documentation these days is mostly references that you look up when you need the nitty gritty details and the bigger picture is not documented as well.
123pie123 5y ago
this is my standard way of learning stuff, I don't repeatedly read books just to memorise or remember stuff, but I repeatedly read books because you learn and fully digest certain concepts which are then needed before moving on to other concepts
- JasonFruit 5y ago
  This is exactly it for me: on your first reading, there are underlying concepts you kind of get, but don't fully understand until you grasp what's built on top of them. Then, with that fuller grasp, you can go back and increase your understanding of the underlying material, which lets you understand the superstructure better — and the effect persists for several iterations if the topic is involved enough. Short version: don't be too concerned if you're not completely confident on the details the first time through, because it will make a lot more sense next time around.
  - 123pie123 5y ago
    I also have the same approach for new projects I appologise in advance for the fact I will repeat questions to people and get it wrong initially, it's part of the learning process
ehnto 5y ago
I think rote memorization is less useful in engineering than critical thinking/problem solving, that is probably why. It's not really important you know X value of Y part by heart, you need to know how to get X value of any possible part you encounter. To learn a language, you can't problem solve your way to the solution, you either know it or you don't, and when you use it in practice (in a conversation) you can't look up what you need to know on the spot.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- im3w1l 5y ago
  Memorizing facts is necessary to make them accessible to your critical thinking and problem solving though. Like it's much easier to find a connection between two things you know about compared to two things you could look up.
- wpietri 5y ago
  We're not talking about rote memorization here. We're talking about deeply studying something. In the mid-90s I set up my then-employer's first WAN. Cisco 2501 with T1s for in-city links and frame relay for inter-city/international. As part of our Cisco contract, we got a full manual set, which was maybe 24" of shelf space. In my spare time over a couple of weeks, I sat down and read the whole thing. Then I went back and actually studied the parts that were relevant, mostly by reading and re-reading until it all made sense to me. On top of that, I added a lot of practical experimentation with the gear. But foundational for me was really understanding the perspective of the people who made it.
  - wpietri 5y ago
    For what it's worth, I think this "deep study" mode of learning is perhaps less useful today in tech. We have a lot more things we need to work with with now, and a searchable internet means we can draft off other people's learning a lot more. Deep understanding is both less possible and less useful for the bulk of us, who are mainly integrating lots of libraries, services, tools, and frameworks. But for every given topic, we still need deep experts, like Bruce Dawson was for this processor at Microsoft. So I think this mode is still very valuable, so I agree with Ciantic: this way of learning is something everybody should have at least some practice in.
Cthulhu_ 5y ago
It depends, as always. A CPU is a whole unit, where (I think) it's worth knowing all the details. A programming language's standard library would be more about having a high level overview of what is available, and not a rote reading of all APIs. ...Unless you're into that kind of thing, and I do believe it will help "pick the right tool for the job", instead of writing your own or picking a random library off the internet. Maybe I should make a habit of it, I'm quite invested in Go at the moment. On the other hand, probably a bigger factor is 'arsedness'. I don't have the attention span or interest to read something back-to-front, or maybe not anymore? I don't know for sure. But there's not many things that grip me enough to really draw me in. ...except writing shitpost comments on HN.
- erosenbe0 5y ago
  Yes, I teach my students to always at least look at the overview and see what is available and the taxonomy or ontology! Don't treat all sources as a mere dictionary of self-evident structure. Quitting just because the blurb of immediate interest has been rendered leaves out key opportunities to learn what is available.
scoutt 5y ago
> repeated reading of the material I taught myself almost everything I know, and repeated reading is the method I usually use. I don't memorize, but instead I attack any material to learn by "reading sweeps" (this only applies to topics I know nothing about). I first read all the material and, even if I don't understand a word about anything, I keep going until the end. Then I read everything again from start to end and here I can definitely say that I'm starting to understand. Then again, and this time I allow myself to go back and clarify something I didn't understand. When I feel confident, I try to implement something with the reading material at hand. I can't recall any material that I recently learnt that way but "The definitive guide to the ARM Cortex M3" by Joseph Yiu is a book I remember (back in 2007 when I started with Cortex microcontrollers).
- tomcam 5y ago
  Impressive. I’m just now learning how to learn that way, and I’m at retirement age. My way is much less efficient, because I stop and research each thing I don’t understand until I feel comfortable moving on. Highly inefficient, I now believe. My kid does what you do and learns way faster than I ever did.
- billti 5y ago
  That the approach I've settled on that works best for me. I used to get frustrated that there wasn't "one source" of information that could take me on the journey from novice to expert, and that there was "so much to choose from" on most topics. Now I happily browse through as many sources as I can find, noting which I think are high quality even if above my head, and absorbing what I can for my current knowledge level. Then I'll revisit the good stuff and scan it to pick up the next layer deep, and repeat over select material until I feel I have what I need. The other thing I do is make flashcards as I go (I use an app called Quizlet, but I know there are lots out there). Especially with a new subject, just basic terms can be overwhelming at first. I capture want I feel is important in a question & answer format, and just fire it up when I have to a few mins to run through some flashcards (e.g. waiting for a meeting, sitting on the lav, etc.). It seems to work really well for me.
brucedawson 5y ago
The material was all proprietary/NDA and I don't think it's ever been shared publicly, sorry. The main point I wanted to make with how I became the CPU expert was not actually the "reading multiple times" in order to deeply understand it (although that was important) but rather the fact that I chose to become the CPU expert rather than having it assigned to me. It was one of many times that I became the acknowledged expert of some area, and perhaps therefore in charge of that area, just by working hard in that area until I was "obviously" the expert.
- zeusk 5y ago
  Yeah, I definitely echo this. I work on Display team in Windows and in past worked mostly on IddCx and SoftGpu but recently went through some VESA docs and chimed in my opinion during some meetings. Now I'm leading DisplayPort reliability efforts with graphics IHVs

bostonsre 5y ago

I think it depends alot on your rate of digestion (or understanding? can't find the right word...) of a piece of material. Being dropped in an alien book can make it tough to grasp everything on first pass. If you already have a lot of knowledge that links to the topics being discussed it is a lot easier to grok it in one pass.

foobarian 5y ago

Specifically for CPU manuals, detailed reading used to pay off especially back when every cycle counted. You would spend days rereading tucked away sections describing some weird extension or edge case hoping to harness it for your game/program and get more speed out of it.

Tepix 5y ago

I used to read a lot of books when learning about computer science topics. I'm sure i've read the Camel book at least 4 times over several years. A well written book like that can really do much more than just provide a reference. A lot of documentation these days is mostly references that you look up when you need the nitty gritty details and the bigger picture is not documented as well.

123pie123 5y ago

this is my standard way of learning stuff, I don't repeatedly read books just to memorise or remember stuff, but I repeatedly read books because you learn and fully digest certain concepts which are then needed before moving on to other concepts

JasonFruit 5y ago
This is exactly it for me: on your first reading, there are underlying concepts you kind of get, but don't fully understand until you grasp what's built on top of them. Then, with that fuller grasp, you can go back and increase your understanding of the underlying material, which lets you understand the superstructure better — and the effect persists for several iterations if the topic is involved enough. Short version: don't be too concerned if you're not completely confident on the details the first time through, because it will make a lot more sense next time around.
- 123pie123 5y ago
  I also have the same approach for new projects I appologise in advance for the fact I will repeat questions to people and get it wrong initially, it's part of the learning process

ehnto 5y ago

I think rote memorization is less useful in engineering than critical thinking/problem solving, that is probably why. It's not really important you know X value of Y part by heart, you need to know how to get X value of any possible part you encounter. To learn a language, you can't problem solve your way to the solution, you either know it or you don't, and when you use it in practice (in a conversation) you can't look up what you need to know on the spot.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
im3w1l 5y ago
Memorizing facts is necessary to make them accessible to your critical thinking and problem solving though. Like it's much easier to find a connection between two things you know about compared to two things you could look up.
wpietri 5y ago
We're not talking about rote memorization here. We're talking about deeply studying something. In the mid-90s I set up my then-employer's first WAN. Cisco 2501 with T1s for in-city links and frame relay for inter-city/international. As part of our Cisco contract, we got a full manual set, which was maybe 24" of shelf space. In my spare time over a couple of weeks, I sat down and read the whole thing. Then I went back and actually studied the parts that were relevant, mostly by reading and re-reading until it all made sense to me. On top of that, I added a lot of practical experimentation with the gear. But foundational for me was really understanding the perspective of the people who made it.
- wpietri 5y ago
  For what it's worth, I think this "deep study" mode of learning is perhaps less useful today in tech. We have a lot more things we need to work with with now, and a searchable internet means we can draft off other people's learning a lot more. Deep understanding is both less possible and less useful for the bulk of us, who are mainly integrating lots of libraries, services, tools, and frameworks. But for every given topic, we still need deep experts, like Bruce Dawson was for this processor at Microsoft. So I think this mode is still very valuable, so I agree with Ciantic: this way of learning is something everybody should have at least some practice in.

Cthulhu_ 5y ago

It depends, as always. A CPU is a whole unit, where (I think) it's worth knowing all the details. A programming language's standard library would be more about having a high level overview of what is available, and not a rote reading of all APIs. ...Unless you're into that kind of thing, and I do believe it will help "pick the right tool for the job", instead of writing your own or picking a random library off the internet. Maybe I should make a habit of it, I'm quite invested in Go at the moment. On the other hand, probably a bigger factor is 'arsedness'. I don't have the attention span or interest to read something back-to-front, or maybe not anymore? I don't know for sure. But there's not many things that grip me enough to really draw me in. ...except writing shitpost comments on HN.

erosenbe0 5y ago
Yes, I teach my students to always at least look at the overview and see what is available and the taxonomy or ontology! Don't treat all sources as a mere dictionary of self-evident structure. Quitting just because the blurb of immediate interest has been rendered leaves out key opportunities to learn what is available.

scoutt 5y ago

> repeated reading of the material I taught myself almost everything I know, and repeated reading is the method I usually use. I don't memorize, but instead I attack any material to learn by "reading sweeps" (this only applies to topics I know nothing about). I first read all the material and, even if I don't understand a word about anything, I keep going until the end. Then I read everything again from start to end and here I can definitely say that I'm starting to understand. Then again, and this time I allow myself to go back and clarify something I didn't understand. When I feel confident, I try to implement something with the reading material at hand. I can't recall any material that I recently learnt that way but "The definitive guide to the ARM Cortex M3" by Joseph Yiu is a book I remember (back in 2007 when I started with Cortex microcontrollers).

tomcam 5y ago
Impressive. I’m just now learning how to learn that way, and I’m at retirement age. My way is much less efficient, because I stop and research each thing I don’t understand until I feel comfortable moving on. Highly inefficient, I now believe. My kid does what you do and learns way faster than I ever did.
billti 5y ago
That the approach I've settled on that works best for me. I used to get frustrated that there wasn't "one source" of information that could take me on the journey from novice to expert, and that there was "so much to choose from" on most topics. Now I happily browse through as many sources as I can find, noting which I think are high quality even if above my head, and absorbing what I can for my current knowledge level. Then I'll revisit the good stuff and scan it to pick up the next layer deep, and repeat over select material until I feel I have what I need. The other thing I do is make flashcards as I go (I use an app called Quizlet, but I know there are lots out there). Especially with a new subject, just basic terms can be overwhelming at first. I capture want I feel is important in a question & answer format, and just fire it up when I have to a few mins to run through some flashcards (e.g. waiting for a meeting, sitting on the lav, etc.). It seems to work really well for me.

brucedawson 5y ago

The material was all proprietary/NDA and I don't think it's ever been shared publicly, sorry. The main point I wanted to make with how I became the CPU expert was not actually the "reading multiple times" in order to deeply understand it (although that was important) but rather the fact that I chose to become the CPU expert rather than having it assigned to me. It was one of many times that I became the acknowledged expert of some area, and perhaps therefore in charge of that area, just by working hard in that area until I was "obviously" the expert.

zeusk 5y ago
Yeah, I definitely echo this. I work on Display team in Windows and in past worked mostly on IddCx and SoftGpu but recently went through some VESA docs and chimed in my opinion during some meetings. Now I'm leading DisplayPort reliability efforts with graphics IHVs