What are books? I haven't read them since I was a child - now I only read blog posts and articles.
I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
271–280 of 300 posts
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#272I feel the opposite. I'm reading fewer non-fiction books and more articles and blog posts. Non-fiction books are bloated with fluff to increase the page count to increase the perceived marketability of the book. A lot of the ideas presented in those books could be adequately presented in a 10th of the number of pages. A huge time-saver has been reading the article versions of stuff that has been turned into a book. Y…
>A huge time-saver has been reading the article versions of stuff that has been turned into a book. You get the same points, but in minutes instead of hours. This culture is hugely detrimental. You simply cannot in-depth absorb knowledge about anything in minutes. This isn't how the brain works. Churning through dozens of articles and spending small amounts of time with each one will leave you with no recollection of…
I can’t agree more with what you’re describing. Just working over the information over time, poking at the nuances of a way of thinking is almost impossible through a short article.
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#273I read more than ever overall - both articles and books. I also dislike fluff-stuffed books and I adjust by skimming over such parts. Although I am never sure if I miss important points, I think it is better than wasting time on non-content. The same is true for online articles.
To me, it feels like we have reached a point where information gathering and learning is getting slower and harder due to filler bloat and other distractions. I recognize this most when I go back to a new book or online text after having read in an old book.
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#274I feel the opposite. I'm reading fewer non-fiction books and more articles and blog posts. Non-fiction books are bloated with fluff to increase the page count to increase the perceived marketability of the book. A lot of the ideas presented in those books could be adequately presented in a 10th of the number of pages. A huge time-saver has been reading the article versions of stuff that has been turned into a book. Y…
I'm a compulsive note taker. I find that most practical style books can be shortened into a 10th of the size.
However, some books end up with much longer notes than the books themselves. One of my favorites was actually Aristotle's Poetics. A lot of the classic non-fiction are like that; the article versions are longer.
But what I've learned is avoid most practical books; things that tell you what to do. I think the problem is that the advice is generally weak, and the extra "fluff" is just finding support for this weak advice. An exception is the Pomodoro Technique which works perfectly fine when you don't read the book.
Instead go for the books that study the phenomenon, like The Power of Habit instead of Atomic Habits. Something like 33 Strategies of War is written as a historic book. The summaries tend to be much weaker than the book. Those are the kinds of books you should be reading.
Poetics was actually recommended by a lot of screenwriters, who basically called the rulebook. So you can also go from articles to books when the same books are emerging in multiple sources.
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Non-fiction books are bloated with fluff to increase the page count to increase the perceived marketability of the book. This applies to many non-fiction best-sellers in the self-help and pop science categories, but is very unfair as a generalization about non-fiction. (And bloat is not restricted to non-fiction, either: do we really need 10,000 pages of Wheel of Time or Stormlight Archive?). I'm looking at my book…
Re "Epic Fantasy" I'm a recent fan and discovered I enjoy the worlds. I find them engrossing. imo Sanderson could cut down 10-20% (Rhythm of War in particular suffered from length). But, I did appreciate his own defense of length in the genre. https://www.tor.com/2014/03/04/words-of-radiance-and-the-art... His insight seems to boil down to 1. Treat it as multiple books if you prefer. 2. "I get the chance to write wha…
I mean, #2 isn't a defense. He's just saying that's what he likes. I don't think parent was saying that Stormlight Archive is objectively too long, it was too long for them.
That said, I'm a huge Sanderson fan so as far as I'm concerned the more Sanderson the better! :)
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
Books are also stuck in time. I like Ben Thompson's position here (Stratechery) - his ideas are moving so quickly that he doesn't want to have them stuck in time in a book. He publishes a lot of content and regularly goes back and posts updates to his ways of thinking. I guess you can approximate this with new book editions, but there will always be outdated published versions in circulation without updated context.…
"Stuck in time" is a positive. Why should I pay attention to a writer who's constantly changing their mind and retracting their work?
That he is staying up to date in the ever changing landscape that is tech field?
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#277The gate-keeping around reading is insane. A book is just long-form writing. Other than its length, a book is fundamentally no different than any other form of written communication. There are bad books just as there are bad blog posts. Length can be an important differentiator, for sure. But I don't ever see that as the topic of conversation. Only book vs blog vs tweet. Be more specific. Rather than just say "books"…
I'd say that most of the distinction between books and blogs / other online writing is about the process and result rather than of the physical form of the product itself, though that has some bearing (see my recent comments elsewhere in this thread). If you're familiar with the literature on writing itself --- fiction or nonfiction --- what becomes clear is how books are crafted . There's the idea, often research, o…
Many books are written with less care than an investigative journalist writing their big reveal. Many books follow your process as a go-to market strategy, and not crafting a work of art.
Mike Tyson dictated his book. Self help gurus pay editors and writers to spin their 10 steps into a full "book."
Not all books use such a prestigious process. In fact, most don't.
Per my initial comment, it is not books but well crafted literature at any length. Using the term "book" to describe that is lazy and ignores the many excellent short form pieces and overwhelming amount of garbage books that get produced every day.
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#278I feel the opposite. I'm reading fewer non-fiction books and more articles and blog posts. Non-fiction books are bloated with fluff to increase the page count to increase the perceived marketability of the book. A lot of the ideas presented in those books could be adequately presented in a 10th of the number of pages. A huge time-saver has been reading the article versions of stuff that has been turned into a book. Y…
This, 10 times. I have such good blogs in my inbox, with easily the quality of the best books I could read, and I don't even have time to go though them. And I don't see any that I'd like to remove - if anything, I'm sure I could easily add to them if I go through each one's blogroll. The last non-fiction books on the other hand were huge disappointments. Even Daniel Kahneman, to my surprise: Noise had a good idea an…
I’m constantly astonished “Thinking Fast and Slow” is so highly recommended - I question if the advocates actually read the book in depth.
I remember reading most of the book and skipping a couple of chapters. While the results and ideas are great, I feel most of the chapter is the historical background, Ie “Tversky and I were doing this in the 60s …” It could be heavily reduced and still get the point across.
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd say that most of the distinction between books and blogs / other online writing is about the process and result rather than of the physical form of the product itself, though that has some bearing (see my recent comments elsewhere in this thread). If you're familiar with the literature on writing itself --- fiction or nonfiction --- what becomes clear is how books are crafted . There's the idea, often research, o…
Many books are written with less care than an investigative journalist writing their big reveal. Many books follow your process as a go-to market strategy, and not crafting a work of art. Mike Tyson dictated his book. Self help gurus pay editors and writers to spin their 10 steps into a full "book." Not all books use such a prestigious process. In fact, most don't. Per my initial comment, it is not books but well cra…
Investigative journalists writing a big reveal ... write with more care than most journalists and columnists.
You're cherry-picking the epitome of good journalism and comparing it as a class to all books.
The same things that go into writing a good incisive investigative journalism piece or series (many of which ... eventually emerge as books) is what makes a good book a good book. And a book offers time for that process* which a daily or weekly publication focused on current events simply doesn't have. Books trade off timeliness for quality (again, generally). Yes, there are non-topical periodicals which operate with fewer time constraints. Exceptions prove rules.
That is: there's a qualified author, assignment to a given topic, integrity in the pursuit of the story or narrative, research and editorial support in accomplishing that task, and extensive editing and rewriting to produce the most impactful, accurate, and highest-impact piece possible.
Another commonality is that those good pieces run long. A truly in-depth article probably starts at about 6,000 words (12 pages in book print, often less typeset for a newspaper or magazine), and can easily run 15, 30, 60, 90 thousand words, or more.
John Hersey's Hiroshima was published in the 31 August 1946 issue of the New Yorker. I don't find the page-count of that issue though I suspect it was on the order of 80 pages. The book version runs 166 pages, or about 80,000 words.
Hunter S. Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail was serialised in Rolling Stone before being published as a book, 506 pp, or 250,000 words.
A blog and podcast I follow, The History of Philosophy by Peter Adamson is likewise being produced as a book series. The books add to what's already in the (quite well-produced) podcast.
If we instead look at most or median blogs, newspaper or magazine columns, articles (again, daily or weekly/monthly), or at the top decile of each, I think you'll find, again, that books in general exceed typical quality found elsewhere.
And again, it's not the form but the process.
Re: I don't read web articles anymore, but I read books
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I stopped reading non-fiction books. Most of them have about a blog post worth of ideas, but the publisher had the author pad it out to X00 pages because that's what makes their business model make sense. (One trick here is to buy short/small non-fiction books.) Looking at books to use in class, I'm constantly surprised at how many words they use to convey so few concepts. Teaching is an optimization problem, and i…
I'm interested in the statement 'teaching is an optimization problem'. I enjoy teaching (did it professionally for a brief and happy time in my life) but this is the first time I've encountered the idea it's an optimization problem. Could you speak a bit more on that? Regarding making money, I've found at least one way that I think aligns the different needs - some of the videos on my youtube channel are book reviews…
I love the affiliate link idea, as long as the videos aren't primarily built to drive traffic to the affiliate link. Those tend to be fluff. (Not saying you're doing that, but I know it happens.)
Re optimization, imagine an instructional book on any particular topic, and the publisher decides that to maximize revenue, the book must be 350 pages. But the topic can be concisely and effectively covered in 150 pages. So the author pads the content with unrelated topics and verbosity. It's now an inefficient way to learn the material. It could be optimized by bringing it to 150 pages.
But is that all? Is there some way to get the same amount of learning done in 100 pages? In 50 pages?
I have a 20 page powerpoint presentation. Is that the best way of getting this information across? Could I craft a three sentence problem prompt, split the class into teams, and have them learn more in less time?
Stuff like that.