Conversation

it's WILD how much more I learn from a recorded lecture than a live one - watch at 2x speed - pause and think - read the book and try problems as I go - stop if i'm too tired, do it later can cram tons of learning into 90 mins, vs. almost 0 retention with in person
6
8
146
i simply do not understand the point of trying to transmit difficult material in a giant block of uninterrupted linear speech with no random access
3
3
43
Only half-serious, but I'm struck. Many people have made this same comment about my essay. It's funny… this is a short essay—4,500 words! A non-fiction book is generally 50k-75k words. I think this illustrates how unpleasant digital reading is: short articles "feel" 10x as long!
2
7
Seems like style of the material may be a key variable? I find lectures and essays fine for certain kinds of ideas, just not detailed technical content I think I got to high comprehension after a quick first read of Books Don't Work, very different for Quantum Country
1
1
Perhaps it's that technical content is harder to compress? The tiny details matter, it's hard for a vague half-understanding to hold any value Whereas for fuzzier discussions (like this one about media) maybe vague understanding from quick skimming is more useful?
1
Replying to and
Hmm. Maybe lower entropy for informal ideas makes it tempting to skip the work of learning? Like, yes, active reading will help understand Gun Germs and Steel better, but a casual read still yields *something* Whereas for math textbook, obvious that casual read yields nothing
Image
4