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

We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

blog.readwise.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 144 posts

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#121

Post by irjustin »

Barrin92 wrote: post #90

can we kill this entire fad of speed reading and productivity life hack nonsense already? I propose we start to advocate slow reading in the spirit of Peter Norvig's learn programming in 10 years , and tell people to actually enjoy what it is they're reading.

I disagree. There are things I want to learn and I really don't care for the fluff.

Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail.

Speed reading has helped me get through those books and learn something where I would have wasted so much time or actually never even picked the book up.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#122

Post by ggm »

Barrin92 wrote: post #90

can we kill this entire fad of speed reading and productivity life hack nonsense already? I propose we start to advocate slow reading in the spirit of Peter Norvig's learn programming in 10 years , and tell people to actually enjoy what it is they're reading.

As a life-long speed/skim reader, 100+

It's been increasingly pointed out to me that my fiction reading habits, which permit enjoyful re-re-re-reading (the constant surprise of things missed each prior reading) are anti-patterns for legal or technical writing: in these cases reading deep, slow, is far better.

There's nothing wrong with re-reading per se. It's about context.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#123

Post by sizzle »

janandonly wrote: post #4

So Bionic reading is just a form of speed reading? And it turns out that comprehension is suffering from trying to read faster... I think that most people, when they read, do a sort of automatic "speed reading" in their mind already. What I mean is: I notice that when I read, my eyes will skip parts of words where I don't need to see all the letters to know what word it is. What if all this trickery simply hinders ou…

It definitely feels faster to read bionic and almost, dare I say it, pleasurable

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#124

Post by tablespoon »

irjustin wrote: post #121
Barrin92 wrote: post #90

can we kill this entire fad of speed reading and productivity life hack nonsense already? I propose we start to advocate slow reading in the spirit of Peter Norvig's learn programming in 10 years , and tell people to actually enjoy what it is they're reading.

I disagree. There are things I want to learn and I really don't care for the fluff. Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail. Speed reading has helped me get through those books and learn something w…

> Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail.

That's not fluff. It's an artifact of people being different and the goal of the book being to connect with someone and make an impact. A list of pithy principles would have no impact and make no connection. The exposition can do that (e.g. relatable story, example of an application that's close enough to the reader's circumstances), but not all of them will connect with every person.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#125

Post by waterhouse »

tablespoon wrote: post #124
irjustin wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. There are things I want to learn and I really don't care for the fluff. Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail. Speed reading has helped me get through those books and learn something w…

> Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail. That's not fluff. It's an artifact of people being different and the goal of the book being to connect with someone and make an impact. A list of pithy pri…

> A list of pithy principles would have no impact and make no connection.

In case anyone wants to put it to the test, here is a book consisting of precisely that (by Rochefoucauld, from the 1600s): https://www.gutenberg.org/files/9105/9105-h/9105-h.htm#linkm...

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#126

Post by dev_tty01 »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #43
O__________O wrote: post #23

Here’s what appears to be an independent review of Spritz: https://www.tsw.it/wp-content/uploads/Rapid-serial-visual-pr... One of the issues with tests like these is that the companies sponsor the research and they are one-off vs long exposure studies; that is as with most interfaces with high-throughput, takes time for the mind to adjust. My guess that given human speech appears to have a universal transmission rate…

> human speech appears to have a universal transmission rate of around 39-bits per second This is unacceptable, we need a modern language that packs information tighter!

No, latin is the only language we'll ever need! It is much closer to the fundamental truth, unlike these modern languages that make unnecessary abstractions of what is really going on at the low level.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#127

Post by tablespoon »

waterhouse wrote: post #125
tablespoon wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail. That's not fluff. It's an artifact of people being different and the goal of the book being to connect with someone and make an impact. A list of pithy pri…

> A list of pithy principles would have no impact and make no connection. In case anyone wants to put it to the test, here is a book consisting of precisely that (by Rochefoucauld, from the 1600s): https://www.gutenberg.org/files/9105/9105-h/9105-h.htm#linkm...

Maybe "no impact" was overstating it a little bit, but I think the point still stands. They often have far less impact when they're not reinforced by the right story or example, but that story or example won't be the same for everyone.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#128

Post by tartoran »

Barrin92 wrote: post #90

can we kill this entire fad of speed reading and productivity life hack nonsense already? I propose we start to advocate slow reading in the spirit of Peter Norvig's learn programming in 10 years , and tell people to actually enjoy what it is they're reading.

> in the spirit of Peter Norvig's learn programming in 10 years, and tell people to actually enjoy what it is they're reading.

Not everything should be enjoyed though and that needs to be better known lest people feel they’re doing it wrong when reading skimmable material back to back.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#129

Post by mike_hock »

irjustin wrote: post #121
Barrin92 wrote: post #90

can we kill this entire fad of speed reading and productivity life hack nonsense already? I propose we start to advocate slow reading in the spirit of Peter Norvig's learn programming in 10 years , and tell people to actually enjoy what it is they're reading.

I disagree. There are things I want to learn and I really don't care for the fluff. Ironically (or not?) self-help books are absolutely full of fluff but at their core can have very useful/helpful ideas. They just get expounded upon back up with 10 specific examples where each example starts at the beginning of the person's life in full detail. Speed reading has helped me get through those books and learn something w…

Variable-speed reading. Quickly skim over the fluff and slow down for the actual information.

Re: We found no evidence that Bionic Reading has a positive effect on reading speed

#130

Post by chmod775 »

tablespoon wrote: post #127
waterhouse wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A list of pithy principles would have no impact and make no connection. In case anyone wants to put it to the test, here is a book consisting of precisely that (by Rochefoucauld, from the 1600s): https://www.gutenberg.org/files/9105/9105-h/9105-h.htm#linkm...

Maybe "no impact" was overstating it a little bit, but I think the point still stands. They often have far less impact when they're not reinforced by the right story or example, but that story or example won't be the same for everyone.

How could an author who knows nothing about you possibly be better than yourself at construing an example applicable to you?

It then seems to me these kinds of books must be made for people who want others to think for them.

So maybe all these books should say is: "Think. Your problem is a lack of aforementioned activity. If you need some food for thought here's a list of ten pithy principles. Flip to page two for an afterword by my publisher."

Of course that wouldn't be good business sense. Why show someone the spring when you can sell them water?

Post reply on HN