Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Best Books I Read in 2015

gatesnotes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 157 posts

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#91

Post by gnrme »

jbuss wrote: post #4
e15ctr0n wrote: post #3

Here are some other lists of 'Best books of 2015': Goodreads https://www.goodreads.com/choiceawards/best-books-2015 Amazon http://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=13108091011 The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/entertainment/best-b... The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/books/review/100-notable-b... The Economist http://www.economist.com/news/books-and-arts/21679439-best-b...

The Goodreads top books list is just a popularity contest. People vote for the books they recognize.

Goodreads rating system is useless anyway. It's 'out of five' which means most people will give a good book a 4 or a 5 star - it's not like IMDb's more nuanced 'out of ten' rating.

They also display a bespoke meaning for the stars (i.e. 3 doesn't mean average), so for those that follow that meaning, their ratings will be different.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#92

Post by nostrebored »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #56
Negitivefrags wrote: post #7

I'm always sad that lists like this from tech people never contain any fiction. I have often seen the sentiment that everything you read should have some kind of educational value or it's just a waste of time. Does Bill Gates not read fiction? Perhaps he understands that he would be looked down on if he were to include some in his list.

I feel like I can get my fix of fiction via TV and movies which is probably close to one hundred hours per month, perhaps more. More fiction is not what I need right now. I suspect most people's media consumption follows mine. Books are great for learning while TV/movies are great for storytelling. Yes, I understand the benefits of the novel, but its value proposition for me from a time perspective is very poor, espe…

(Most) Books contain relatively little violence, sex, and especially sexualized violence in comparison to TV and movies. When study after study has shown that what you consume affects how you think, I find this a huge point in favor of books. The amount that people are (and the amount that i have been) desensitized to violence today is insane.

I would say they also leave more room for plot development and concise endings. Most shows today drag on for season after season and don't have satisfying culminations. I've also seen very few movies that can make me think like a work of fiction can. Seeing the world through another relatable person's eyes can be a very profound experience.

Ignoring fiction or non fiction is a tragedy in my opinion.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#93

Post by kbenson »

sanderjd wrote: post #87
kbenson wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are few things as satisfying to read as a witty denouncement. Sometimes the accuracy (which I have no knowledge of) can rightly take a backseat to the theater, as long as you remember to not take it too seriously.

This is a sentiment that makes no sense to me. Instead of remembering to not take it too seriously and enjoying the theater (regardless of accuracy), why not remember that the target of such articles is a real person and not an abstract object to be harmlessly ridiculed. Why celebrate meanness?

Is the target a person? I'm pretty sure it was a person't public product. In this case, their public words, opinions and critiques. If your job is to produce works for public consumption and you can't stand a critique of your work, you should find another career.

To clarify my earlier point, there are few things as satisfying to read as a witty evisceration of an argument or stance. For a public persona, I don't see much problem with applying it to their wider body of work as long as you think the criticism applies well overall. My earlier statement was fairly ambiguous in this respect.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#95

Post by jonknee »

graffitici wrote: post #94

I wonder how much that video must have cost him! It's such a great production. I really like the way the table and the props match the theme of the relevant book. I'm guessing $10K for the one minute video?

I'm sure he's got video people on staff, so probably very little marginal cost. Look back at some older posts, there are a lot of videos. Here's one from last week about his dad's 90th birthday:

http://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Happy-Birthday-Da...

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#96

Post by jay_kyburz »

gnrme wrote: post #91
jbuss wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Goodreads top books list is just a popularity contest. People vote for the books they recognize.

Goodreads rating system is useless anyway. It's 'out of five' which means most people will give a good book a 4 or a 5 star - it's not like IMDb's more nuanced 'out of ten' rating. They also display a bespoke meaning for the stars (i.e. 3 doesn't mean average), so for those that follow that meaning, their ratings will be different.

I find it's still a fairly good indicator. Last time I was looking for a new author I went back and compared the author's average rating. Authors I like were 4+. Authors I think are OK scored about 3.5. Authors who I won't read again were generally 3 or so.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#98

Post by officemonkey »

r00fus wrote: post #80
jacalata wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence of that, or are you just saying 'of course Amazon must have done something'? I use goodreads and haven't noticed any changes that would cause that.

I have - mainly for Audible - I've noticed some commenters noting how there's only interest in a given book (in this case, the Arawn Cycle) because Audible did a sale on the series. Why did Amazon purchase Goodreads?

Most people aren't active readers. Goodreads users are active readers. Amazon bought Goodreads (and other sites like Shelfari) because that's where the readers are.

I read 74 books so far this year. Most of them were purchased from Amazon.

Also, Goodreads has an active review community, and good "by reader" data for recommendations (as opposed to Amazon's "by account" data. If Amazon were smart, they'd be working very hard on improving recommendations with their Goodreads data.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#99

Post by gnrme »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #96
gnrme wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goodreads rating system is useless anyway. It's 'out of five' which means most people will give a good book a 4 or a 5 star - it's not like IMDb's more nuanced 'out of ten' rating. They also display a bespoke meaning for the stars (i.e. 3 doesn't mean average), so for those that follow that meaning, their ratings will be different.

I find it's still a fairly good indicator. Last time I was looking for a new author I went back and compared the author's average rating. Authors I like were 4+. Authors I think are OK scored about 3.5. Authors who I won't read again were generally 3 or so.

Perhaps 'useless' is a strong word. It's good for getting a general idea but too many books hover around the 4 mark. Whereas with IMDb anything 6 and above is worth the risk.
Post reply on HN