A woman who went to the library and read every book on the shelf (2014)
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
"The livelihood of an ancient indian tribe was buffalo hunting. If the hunters came back with a small amount of kill or, unimaginable, empty-handed, from their Springtime hunts, the village would go mostly hungry for the next four months and many people would die. Luckily, before each hunt the village's shaman gave the head of the hunters a map with lines drawn on a hide that will guide the group to where the buffalo is. Without this map, the hunters wouldn't find where the buffalo gathered on the Great Plains.
A young hunter was curious about how the shaman always knew where the buffalo gathered, so before the Springtime Hunting Festival, he hid in the shaman's tipi and secretly watched jim as he prepared the map. There were many steps involved but in essence the shaman did the following: After calling on divine powers he crumpled a large raw piece of hide that was softened with oils. That was it! Then the lines to guide the hunters appeared correctly drawn by gods' will every time the map was created."
I usually employ a similar random search strategy (e.g. http://www.jmlr.org/papers/volume13/bergstra12a/bergstra12a....) to select a book when I'm at a library, though not as extensive as the method described in the article.
Competing demands for my time cured me of this list, and I came to view reading not as something indisputably virtuous (as my schooling had trained me to do), but as just another form of consumption.
There is such a thing as too much consumption. Junk books are no better than junk food, and even a diet of classics might be no better for your head than constant fine dining is for your gut.
I now take more care in choosing to give my time and energy to reading.
And by the way, I don't believe in giving up on junk books. I think a good mix of fun but trashy and serious books is better. Just like anything in life: I wouldn't want to have only deep meaningful conversations or eat only fine dining or only write computer programs that do something useful or stop playing basketball just because I'm terrible at it or learn only prestigious fields of math... I think it's OK to do something just for fun, not everything needs to be edifying.
They are absolutely horrible. They give you nothing of value, not even education. They were mostly written by two authors who grew to despise each other,
They take a couple of hours to read, maybe a little more. They are the pinnacle of pointless time wasting. I read most of them while in the service.
They are perfect in every way.
------------
[1] David Morrell is probably best known for First Blood, the novel Rambo is based on.
Personally I also feel like books don’t “numb” my brain the way TV does. Sitting down with a book for hours, even “junk” doesn’t leave me feeling dumber the way watching hours of TV does. I imagine that reading activates higher order brain function a lot more than TV.
The result was he found some interesting books (and some turds too). I could not argue with his logic that 20 years later none of the information I got sitting through an hour of the "Six Million Dollar Man" would be useful but something he got from one of the books might be.
(And am I alone in missing card catalogs? Picking a random card out of the catalog and reading the next three books in alphabetical order right after that card?)
And aren't books on-average filled with bad information and low-quality content? That ratio for the general catalog of your typical library is not very good.
I think I'd feel better about watching Six Million Dollar Man.
I am probably a "dinosaur" reader. I have, and use a Kindle, but given the choice of reading a physical book or same book on Kindle, I will choose physical book 99% of the time.
There is just something about a real book that is deeply satisfying to read.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/aug/19/readers-absorb...
Ebooks also might negatively affect sleep:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-learning-secret...
http://www.npr.org/2016/04/17/474525392/attention-students-p...
If I don't have paper nearby, I write in the margins and dogear the pages, and then refer back to the book to extract the information later. I keep a few pens and pencils in my pocket at all times.
Reading on a phone, I get the ability to look up unfamiliar words immediately, add them to my spaced recognition tool if they seem useful, add quotes to my quote file, and arrange notes on new things learned either per book, or on a per project basis. In addition, taking notes like this they are still available over the years, and backed up in multiple places, whereas the paper notes I have taken are either filed away somewhere or lost during one of my moves.
Perhaps a good solution exists? It wouldn’t be hard to make.
Close attention and years of reading are important to writing code worth writing. I read literature oriented around "skunkworks" sized teams and applied them at somewhat similar scales. The better literature is fantastic. But the literature presumes too much of readers and means little outside operative exposure to multiple successful applications. Folks seeking method for quick home runs are barking up the wrong trees from the beginning.