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

Kinds of Focus

andrewbadr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 20 posts

Re: Kinds of Focus

#11

Post by chronomex »

unimpressive wrote: post #4

Too long; Didn't Read TL;DR TL We're already seeing conventions popping up to deal with this change in behavior. They just aren't formalized yet. I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article. Of course, that speaks nothing to the nature of the actual article…

> I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article.

Abstract, introduction, paper.

Re: Kinds of Focus

#12

Post by gruseom »

unimpressive wrote: post #4

Too long; Didn't Read TL;DR TL We're already seeing conventions popping up to deal with this change in behavior. They just aren't formalized yet. I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article. Of course, that speaks nothing to the nature of the actual article…

But it's exactly the other way around. We don't need more brevity and speed. We need less. How much gold do we mine by digging with a teaspoon here and there for five minutes?

Re: Kinds of Focus

#13

Post by gruseom »

madiator wrote: post #8
gruseom wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse my irritability, but no one here needs to hear that "one should not leave [the internet] out altogether". And this is obviously not what Hamming was talking about in 1986.

Just to make it clear, I was agreeing with you for the most part, except that I decided to add my own viewpoint. If that offends you, sorry about that.

I'm not offended personally and hope you feel the same. Let me try to explain what my issue is. I object to the cheap argument for "balance" that commonly shows up when someone is making a specific point. "By all means, let's acknowledge X, but on the other hand let's not throw out Y" -- that kind of thing. I object because it's so unobjectionable. Who could be against it? It just sits there like a big impassive blob pumping lukewarm water into the conversation and diluting everything interesting about it. That is what I felt your comment did. But my annoyance is at the general phenomenon, not at you. That's part of the problem with these patterns; you can't object to them without changing the subject even further (and coming across as a jerk).

The interesting thing in the current conversation is the question of how and why reading articles on the internet is comparatively shallow, more shallow than it would seem like it ought to be from the surface. Speaking metaphorically (and no I do not have "data" on this), it is as if it provides druglike stimulation to some outer layer of the brain without ever reaching the deeper, slower layers where the truly valuable transformations are possible. Or, to change the metaphor, it is like the difference between sugar highs and nutrition. It seems clear that it is an addictive cycle, leading to a starvation problem: we spend so much time at the shallow stimulation that we have little left for deep reflection. It reminds me of rats in a cage pushing a lever for cocaine pellets. I sometimes wonder if future generations will look back on this as an epidemic that took a while to recognize and get under control.

Re: Kinds of Focus

#14

Post by unimpressive »

chronomex wrote: post #11
unimpressive wrote: post #4

Too long; Didn't Read TL;DR TL We're already seeing conventions popping up to deal with this change in behavior. They just aren't formalized yet. I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article. Of course, that speaks nothing to the nature of the actual article…

> I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article. Abstract, introduction, paper.

I was talking about in other contexts besides Academia. But yes, that is one solution. And it does work in print. But it has to co-exist alongside the other content.

Re: Kinds of Focus

#15

Post by no_more_death »

Wow -- just reading this, I felt my concentration patterns change.

This is why, as a Christian, I meditate on something, instead of simply emptying my mind. I spent an hour or so in Psalm 119 this morning, contemplating a few verses, comparing with my life, and shaping my thinking to fit those verses.

Here's a thought. What if 50 of us committed to checking /newest at a particular time (say, 5 am), finding 2 articles worth reading, and adding a substantive, reflective comment to start things off?

That would gigantically impact Hacker News if we did that. In fact, I'm going to do that right now.

Re: Kinds of Focus

#16

Post by derleth »

chronomex wrote: post #11
unimpressive wrote: post #4

Too long; Didn't Read TL;DR TL We're already seeing conventions popping up to deal with this change in behavior. They just aren't formalized yet. I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article. Of course, that speaks nothing to the nature of the actual article…

> I think this will be another advantage that hypermedia will have over regular old print, you will be able to present your information in "layers". A TL;DR for reference, a summary, and then the full article. Abstract, introduction, paper.

> Abstract, introduction, paper.

Which makes it hilarious when people rail against "The TL;DR Mindset" as something brand-new and created by the Internet.

Re: Kinds of Focus

#17

Post by pirateking »

KalobT wrote: post #7

Keeping an open mind is always great. However, being unable to focus on one task and become superior at it is quickly becoming an issue. Today, if I remember correctly, the average attention span is only 8 seconds. Remember: Jack of all trades is the master of none.

Disagree with your last point.

A jack of all trades is a master of the unique combination of his relative skill in each of those trades.

Re: Kinds of Focus

#18

Post by mtmcarter »

N64 Emulator The N64 premiered throughout mid-1996 seeing that Nintendo’s front side-blue runner while in the first next-age bracket gaming console wars. Is usually was obviously a better run unit when compared with Sony’s Ps3 or perhaps Sega’s Saturn, the N64 usually lagged driving around profits. Nintendo made a decision to advertise the equipment about the merits of its rapid-launching container program plus the small idea that the idea highlighted your 64-tiny bit architectural mastery – regrettably for Manufacturers, individuals were extra astounded by high-volume Mp3 mass media, with-video game dvd sequences and also before-documented soundtracks than rapid running and the sized your machine’s line.

http://emulatorzone.bcz.com/

Re: Kinds of Focus

#20

Post by r41nbowcrash »

>When the number of incoming stimuli is reduced, the mind gradually perceives finer details in the ones that remain. This is famously true of blind people, but you can consciously narrow your attention to the same effect.

Or starts hallucinating stuff (ganzfeld effect, Charles Bonnet syndrome)

"Open systems communicate and live. Closed systems do not communicate, become non-discerning, uninteresting and die." - Col. John Boyd

Post reply on HN