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

101–110 of 157 posts

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#101

Post by minimuffins »

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?

Shall we create a safespace for beigeist conservative think pieces?

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#102

Post by mountaingoating »

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…

Every time is see a post like this I get the urge to pretentiously rant about the ongoing decline of appreciation for aesthetic values. Tech culture often seems completely tonedeaf on artistic issues. Talking about the "value proposition" of the novel is borderline comical. If the fiction books you've read could be edited down to novella length, you should read better fiction books.

I have no idea how we got to a place where the value of Tolstoy, Cervantes, Flaubert, etc. needs to be defended from Breaking Bad and cinema (not that there's anything wrong with Breaking Bad and cinema). But apparently most people currently seem to be at a point where if they read the first few pages of "Lectures on Literature" they'd just squint their eyes, cock their heads, and proceed to not understand one part of what it means to "remain a little aloof and take pleasure in this aloofness while at the same time we keenly enjoy—passionately enjoy, enjoy with tears and shivers—the inner weave of a given masterpiece"

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#103

Post by paganel »

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?

> Why celebrate meanness?

Because meanness stands at the basis of our Western civilization, of which this website is more or less a part of. Think of Cicero's "Catiline Orations", which was an ad-hominem attack through and through, Aristophanes's plays, Lucian of Samosata's works, almost everything written by Swift, Shakespeare's Marcus Antonius's speech, which is another much celebrated ad-hominem, and the list goes on and on. Adversity helps us move forward.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#104

Post by bostonpete »

mei0Iesh wrote: post #81

I can't read any of that because I'm distracted by the mental image of Bill telling someone the best books he read, with some conversation, and that person asking some questions while writing notes, then spending hours in front of his laptop, emailing a draft to someone else, who asks Bill a few more questions then returns a draft to someone else who finalizes it and publishes on "GatesNotes" written as if he sat dow…

I think people read these notes for the "big ideas" presented, not for the majestic prose of Bill Gates. Given that, why do you care who assembles and copyedits the information for him?

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#105

Post by MaysonL »

whatever_dude wrote: post #60
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.

You show follow John Carmack[0] or Elon Musk[1] on twitter. They keep making my sci fi queue grow (John more so than Elon though). [0] https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk

Speaking of science fiction, I've just been rereading Ken MacLeod's Fall Revolution [0] series. Great stuff, and I totally agree with Kim Stanley Robinson's assessment: "He is writing revolutionary SF. A nova has appeared in our sky."

[0] The Star Fraction, The Stone Canal, The Cassini Division, and The Sky Road.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#106

Post by conistonwater »

nostromo wrote: post #68
ar-jan wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The critique is of how Brooks handles reporting facts in general. The joke I quoted is based on a specific example Brooks gave, which is traced to its original source (Brooks mentioned one of the authors, Nisbett - see http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=478 ). I linked to the other page because it contains links to about a dozen other posts looking into Brooks' writing. There might be other evidence supporting h…

Read the column. He's very obviously talking about multiple studies. The Nisbett study was about farm animals, not fish. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/opinion/12brooks.html > When the psychologist Richard Nisbett showed Americans individual pictures of a chicken, a cow and hay and asked the subjects to pick out the two that go together, the Americans would usually pick out the chicken and the cow.

That one also appears in the llog posts if you follow the links: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=478

As far as I can tell, their critique is correct in that the research Brooks cites isn't enough to support the claims that he wants to make.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#107

Post by conistonwater »

nostromo wrote: post #49
ar-jan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Here's a Radio Yerevan take on Brooks' writings, from Language Log: > Question to Language Log: Is it correct that if you show an American an image of a fish tank, the American will usually describe the biggest fish in the tank and what it is doing, while if you ask a Chinese person to describe a fish tank, the Chinese will usually describe the context in which the fish swim? > Answer: In principle, yes. But…

That's a pretty lame critique. It seems they're purposefully reading the wrong study, since there is another study that focuses on Chinese students and backs up Brooks' article. http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1995-... http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/n/x/nxy906/COMPS/CLT/cul... (full text)

I wouldn't be so sure about "purposefully": they are reading the same book (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=478, the book is https://books.google.ca/books?id=525HX623L_cC), but it seems on page 90 instead of 116. Brooks doesn't link to the study itself, not mentioning authors' names, so I think they made a guess about which study he meant.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#108

Post by vlehto »

kbenson wrote: post #93
sanderjd wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

This case was based on: "We should pity David Brooks, because he is not getting laid. And he is slowly losing his sanity."

The author is free to write that. But I'm not going to spread the link.

Re: The Best Books I Read in 2015

#109

Post by manish_gill »

tlrobinson wrote: post #63
davidw wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing wrong with affiliate links if you're a regular user of this site: we're capitalists here. I make sure to include them if I link to a book, because I could use the money more than Jeff Bezos. Of course, I don't link to stuff just for the sake of linking to it, but only do so if I would have anyway. I think it's pretty clear whether someone is a spammer or not. https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=hullo seems t…

Perhaps, but taking a famous person's list of books and reposting it with affiliate links and no disclaimer is definitely crossing the line in my book.

Why? I'm genuinely interesting in your line of reasoning.
Post reply on HN