Bill Gates: Books I Read this Summer | Hacker News Reader

Bill Gates: Books I Read this Summer

thegatesnotes.com

266 pointsclbrook96 comments

I'm finding that writing reviews, even very surface-level reviews, of books I am reading is helping me to derive a lot more value from them.

Firstly, while reading, I find myself reflecting more on the book. After all -- I will be writing a review, I need to be an active participant.

Secondly, I find that books will often spark some thinking on a topic and the review will essentially morph into an essay. I wrote a 3000-word review of one book[1] that diverged into fuzzy logic, theories of jurisprudence and a few other areas in order to properly explain my reaction. Right now I'm writing a review of Waltzing with Bears that will diverge into financial accounting and a pet theory of mine about how tools create paradigms that shape entire bodies of knowledge.

Third, books can often be connected to one another. I find that my reviews tend to link to each other. Not because I am trying to drive internal link traffic (I'm basically a nobody in internet terms, it's not worth the bother). But book A will have tangentially touched on the topic of book B; or perhaps book C illuminates something only poorly discussed in book D. To the point where I refer to books from before I started reviewing with an "unreviewed" annotation.

Finally, some people find my reviews useful. My hobby is Olympic-style weightlifting and I do a lot of reading both on it directly and on allied subjects (eg, anatomy). Fellow strength nerds have found my reviews useful in helping them select books for their own libraries. It's nice when people give you positive feedback on something like that.

[1] http://chester.id.au/2012/04/09/review-drift-into-failure/

Any thoughts on that Moonwalking With Einstein book? I'd love to improve information retention in my day to day life, especially in software. I'm not so much interested in remembering the to-do list as retaining broader concepts for long periods of time. I'm lucky enough to get to learn a ton of things every day, but my long term retention of them is terrible unless I spend considerable time applying these ideas in practice, which is often not practically possible. This leads to a lot of wasted time, it's as if I never even read the darn thing.

Often, and this is the sad part, I won't even bother reading something because I know I'll forget it almost immediately, unless I have a block of time available to dedicate to trying it out in practice.

For example, I'm really fond of the underpinnings of programming language design and compilers, and it's thousands over thousands of pages of information (most of it very interesting and useful to me), but I fail to retain the vast majority of the great info and need to continuously go back to the texts whenever I'm in doubt about something. There were a couple of valuable techniques recommended in Pragmatic Bookshelf's Pragmatic Thinking and Learning, such as "now pretend you have to teach this concept to your former self who knows nothing about this", which supposedly helps with retention and internalization into the brain's "web of known facts".

Is there anything like that in the book? Would it be of any help?

Yeah, the book starts by stating that everyone can have a photographic-like memory if they practice the right techniques, goes on to explain the history of the art of memory, and then intersperses detailed descriptions of the techniques with a fascinating autobiography. It's probably not the best tutorial, but it's a great starting point and also a really fun and fast read. At the very least, I can guarantee it will greatly change the way you look at what the human brain is capable of.

Agree - this is an entertaining book. If you commute, the audio version is worth getting.

If you're looking for more detailed techniques, Harry Lorayne's books might be better.

Foer's book pairs a solid survey of techniques to master memory with a great story about his own disciplined walk through the world of competitive recall. I think you will like it.

And yeah, within a free-ranging story well told, there are introductions to multiple techniques (some of them rooted in the ancient, like the “Method of Loci", and some of them interesting contemporary 'cheats') that you might want to try applying to your retention of dense texts. I totally recognize & share the difficulty you describe.

Recommended...give it a shot.

You should look into Anki and "Spaced Repetition."

The gist is that you submit a bunch of facts you want to remember to a computer program, and that program applies an algorithm to figure out when you are likely to be about to forget something. The program quizzes you just as you were about to forget (but before you do), and the act of responding to that quiz renews and strengthens the memory.

Powerful. I've been using it for myself and my 9 year old daughter, and it has been very effective. Many use it to build foreign language vocabulary, or memory of Chinese pictographs.

(Note: This is not the subject of the "Moonwalk with Einstein" book -- I mention it as an additional tool for helping with the memory goals you stated).

Some Links:

Anki: http://ankisrs.net/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_repetition

Article on Piotr Wozniak and Spaced Repetition: http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-05/ff_woznia...

I'm really glad you brought up spaced repetition since spaced repetition and the techniques described in Moonwalking with Einstein happen to be two of the items on my relatively small list of the most amazing things humans are capable of that they neglected to teach me in kindergarten. I'm sure most people on HN are unfamiliar with both, so I'd like to give a brief overview of what they are and how they work.

The techniques described in Moonwalking with Einstein require serious time investment up front, but allow you to cultivate a memory that rivals that of people with savantism (who incidentally tend to use the same general techniques but do so naturally). Spaced repetition doesn't produce as amazing results but doesn't require initial time investment and is a far more efficient method of memorizing data than conventional approaches. The only downside to spaced repetition is that most software implementations of it require daily review and don't work optimally if you miss a day (recent versions of the proprietary SuperMemo, Piotr Wozniak's own software, are supposed to be much more forgiving), but you don't need to invest much time each day.

So how exactly do these two memory techniques work? Spaced repetition is predicated on the notion that the longer you wait before reviewing data, the longer that information will stick in your head. That is, as long as you are able to recall the data when you review it. If you wait too long, you'll completely forget the data. So there exists an optimal length of time to wait before reviewing a piece of data, and as with the American game show The Price is Right, you can approach that optimal value by increasing your estimate, but the moment your estimate exceeds that optimal value, it becomes less useful than all possible underestimates. The goal of spaced repetition systems (SRS), such as the software programs SuperMemo, Mnemosyne, and Anki, is to adapt to the user's mind and figure out this optimal interval to wait before showing a flash card again, as opposed to conventional flash card systems that review each card every day. Not only does spaced repetition greatly increase the value of each time you review a card by committing it further into your long term memory, but it also greatly decreases the number of flash cards you need to review each day.

The art of memory (aka method of loci), which is the technique described in Moonwalking with Einstein, works by taking advantage of the fact that our visual and spacial memory is far better than our memory for arbitrary facts. The gist of the technique is to convert data that you want to memorize into vivid images (the funnier or cruder the better) and arrange those images at discrete points in a predefined order along a spacial layout you know well (the layout is called a "memory palace", but it can be your home, school, office, neighborhood, favorite video game map, etc.). To recall the data, all you have to do is retrace your steps and remind yourself what each image means. Combining this technique with spaced repetition, you can commit thousands of pieces of data to a memory palace, wait a few hours to retrace your steps to recall the information, retrace your steps again the next day, then again a few days later, then again a week later, then a month later, etc. In this way, about two or three hours distributed over 5 or so weeks (maybe with one more review the next year) will let you memorize thousands of pieces of data permanently. The stuff you can do with your mind once you know more efficient memory techniques is truly amazing.

Thanks for the explanation, very useful!

Recommendations for what to do / read after checking out the book? It sounds like you've put some time and effort into this, so it'd be great if you could provide further recommendations.

To be honest, I know a lot more about spaced repetition than I do about creating memory palaces. My only exposure to the latter is from Foer's book, and while I've begun using my house as a memory palace to easily memorize short lists (15 or fewer items) [1], I haven't been ready yet to devote the time needed to memorize specific paths through hundreds of discrete locations in order to memorize longer things like speeches or several thousand Chinese characters. The best advice I could give you is read Foer's book first, and then you should know what elements of the art of memory you should pursue further. Oh, after you finish Moonwalking with Einstein, you'll probably want to start building memory palaces, and this post has a good suggestion for creating new ones: http://www.michaelcorayer.com/2011/03/31/resource-for-memory...

[1] Even without jumping into the amazing world of memory palaces, you can still take away a lot of little gems from the book, including seemingly obvious things that you probably never bothered to think of. For example, the author says, "Words that rhyme are much more memorable than words that don’t; concrete nouns are easier to remember than abstract nouns; dynamic images are more memorable than static images; alliteration aids memory. A striped skunk making a slam dunk is a stickier thought than a patterned mustelid engaging in athletic activity."

http://www.ted.com/talks/joshua_foer_feats_of_memory_anyone_... TED Talk on the 2nd method you were describing. (At least I think it's what you were describing)

Exactly! He's the author of Moonwalking with Einstein, the book Bill Gates raved about in the parent article.

Oh haha, I didn't realize he was the author. Watched that video just a few weeks ago.

I'm having trouble figuring out what kinds of "vivid images" you would use for memorizing foreign language vocabulary words.

For example, I'm trying to learn German right now. It seems obvious that you would use images of the English translation in your memory palace, but then you would just have the problem of remembering the German word that each image signifies.

Or going the other way, from German to English, what images would you use in your memory palace to represent German words? How would you tie them back to English?

help?

Figuring out how to encode various classes of data into images is one of the more challenging aspects of the method of loci. Also, memorizing an associative array of data is less natural in the method of loci than memorizing ordered data since the way you recall the data is by tracing your steps through the memory palace in your mind. I guess you could place two images at each location, functioning sort of like a LISP alist (list of pairs where the first element in each pair represents a key and the second a value), but that still doesn't answer your question about how to create the images. Maybe go syllable by syllable? For example, if you wanted to remember that kochen is kitchen, you could visualize a macaw perched on the shoulder of Barbie's boyfriend while the latter flipped burgers on a toy grill. The "caw" sound in my dialect of English is identical to the "ko" in kochen, and Barbie's boyfriend Ken would be enough to trigger my memory of "-chen", so I'd be like "Right! This was illustrating that the German word kochen means to cook."

Spaced repetition lends itself a lot more naturally to memorizing foreign language vocabulary words than the method of loci, so you might want to use that approach instead. Within spaced repetition, you can also use vivid images as a sort of scaffolding to increase the odds you'll remember the word before the next review, and you can eventually let that image go once you start recalling it easily. The more connections you form to other thoughts, the more firmly a fact will be anchored in your mind, so you might as well use mental images if you can come up withthem, even in spaced repetition. James Heisig uses visual mnemonics to teach several thousand Chinese characters in Remembering the Kanji[1] (Chinese characters for use in Japanese) and Remembering the Hanzi[2] (Chinese characters for use in Chinese), and communities like AJATT[3] and Reviewing the Kanji[4] advocate combining Heisig's approach with spaced repetition.

[1] http://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/publications/miscPublications/Rem...

[2] http://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/publications/miscPublications/Rem...

[3] http://www.alljapaneseallthetime.com

[4] http://kanji.koohii.com/

Thanks. So I was understanding it correctly then, it is difficult to use this type of memory method with foreign languages.

I will stick with spaced repetition =)

I'm wondering if it might be easier for a language like Chinese or Japanese, perhaps, where the symbols and words are a bit more visually distinct.

That being said: doesn't Rosetta Stone use a technique that basically relates pictures to common words? I've never tried that program, and only looked at demos briefly, but I've heard great things about it.

> The only downside to spaced repetition is that most software implementations of it require daily review and don't work optimally if you miss a day

I don't think the efficiency penalty is that bad if you do it, say, every other day - I doubt the algorithms are precise down to the day.

Picked up the e-book a few hours ago and read this gem:

"Monotony collapses time; novelty unfolds it. If you spend your life sitting in a cubicle and passing papers, one day is bound to blend unmemorably into the next -- and disappear. That's why it's important to change routines regularly, and take vacations to exotic locales, and have as many new experiences as possible that can serve to anchor our memories. Creating new memories stretches out psychological time, and lengthens our perception of our lives."

Really struck me personally since it reminds me of my grandmother. She's in her 70s now and she has a daily routine that consists of eating, watching the news, playing Hearts, and hygiene duties. She's in really good health but it's obvious that she is getting mentally slower and her memory is fading.

Reason I mention this is because I picked up the book expecting it to be filled with scientific data and memory improvement techniques I've read about before. But instead, it has been a really enjoyable read filled with anecdotes and passages that made me stop and think about how I can improve my personal life (beyond improving memory).

It might not be the best book for what you're looking for specifically but just wanted to share my gains in case it interests anyone.

here is a comment that someone posted on Bill Gates' blog

We have a community of over 1,000 mnemonists-in-training at Mnemotechnics.org where you can learn the techniques from our forum and wiki for free...

I too, am interested in this.

From what I gather reading the synopsis and the relevant discussion here: I'm not so sure how useful it would be for me. At the very least: I think it'd be a challenging technique for me to pick up.

It sounds like it relies on having a good spatial memory, e.g: being able to hold "maps" in your head. I've always been terrible at that, just ask anyone from my D&D campaigns.

However I think I'll pick up a copy of the book; even if I can't apply the techniques it really piqued my interest.

I also have poor spatial memory (especially when it comes to navigating), but the book recommends using a place you're extremely comfortable with as your memory palace. I used the second house I grew up in for the first memory task (a to-do list). After a few times walking through the house and seeing the hilarious images I've placed in each room, not only do I remember the to-do list but I've enhanced my memory of my home. I can remember how the carpet felt, what the wall textures look like, and how it even smelled.

Best of luck to you; it's been really fun so far!

It's kind of funny that he recommends: "Awakening Joy: 10 Steps That Will Put You on the Road to Real Happiness"

Step 1: Be worth billions of dollars

On a serious note, I realize that money doesn't buy happiness. Proven scientifically over and over again, people get used to their situations usually within 6 months, good or bad, and get back to their "normal" happiness levels regardless.

If I remember correctly though - there is a "happiness-threshold" of income, below which life-satisfaction and income are positively correlated.

I think that number for most of the US was around $70k or something. So below that number, income is correlated to happiness. Above that threshold, and the two are unrelated.

It makes sense. Different things start to matter once you have your basic physiological needs in place. But you have to secure that base.

I learned that the threshold was actually simply poverty level which would be significantly under 70k

This topic actually piqued my interest and sent me on a little wiki-stroll:

"Money correlates with happiness, but the rate diminishes with more money. In 2010, Daniel Kahneman and Angus Deaton found that higher earners generally reported better life satisfaction, but people's day-to-day emotional well-being only rose with earnings until a threshold annual income of $75,000."

This entire article is sweet, by the way. Definitely recommended reading for anyone that finds this type of stuff interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness_economics#Individual_...

That is for daily happiness of an employed individual, so for planning a lifetime, one must add overage for future retirement, disability, and medical expenses, and for any dependent spouse and children.

I think this study is cited more than it is warranted. The study measures happiness compared to income. But it says nothing about overall wealth. It makes sense that more income helps happiness only up to a point, as the stresses of simply securing that income become the main drivers of daily stress once basic needs are met. I wonder what the relationship between hourly rate vs happiness looks like.

When income is casually mentioned it is usually understood to mean wealth. This study is then implicitly an argument against focusing on amassing too much wealth, with the claim that being richer won't make you happier. But the methodology of the study just doesn't back this up. We need to be careful how and when it is cited.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslows_hierarchy_of_needs

Downvoted, as I don't believe adding the link without commentary adds value to the discussion.

The study you're thinking of noted that $75k was the level above which additional income would not significantly impact "happiness".

While there are a multitude of caveats needed for any such claim, the most obvious is the fact that $75k means very different things depending on where you live.

The WSJ adjusted the number for cost of living, below :

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/07/what-salary-buys-h...

All of the above should be taken with a grain of salt, but the basic TL;DR is that the figure is actually ~$100k+ in most major US cities.

The flip side of this is that you can also achieve many of the same objectives (i.e. things that impact happiness) on a smaller budget by paying attention to the relevant research on what really makes us happy. The value of happiness research is where it shows us how bad we are at predicting our own preferences. Incorrect predictions are expensive.

Interesting things may happen when one is raised & ingrained with the correlation of income to happiness, then rise above that "happiness threshold". The basic physiological needs may be in place, but the mindset rooted in their absence is not.

This is my favorite paper on money & happiness (actionable & grounded in science):

http://dunn.psych.ubc.ca/files/2012/09/1-s2.0-S1057740811000...

"Money is an opportunity for happiness, but it is an opportunity that people routinely squander because the things they think will make them happy often don't."

I completely agree.

Awesome share. Thanks.

I find it very disturbing and revealing that such a high level and respected guy did read no real book, I mean real books that will be read in 50 years, literature or philosophy, or classics like Seneque, Proust, Montaigne, Austeen.

It maybe he read them all already? Probably not, because if you read Austeen you probably can't spend all your holidays reading self motivation books.

> ...read no real book...

Your post just lost all credibility from that point on. What are "real" books? Can you define it? I'm pretty sure you can't, because there is no thing such as "real" books. Do they have to be pre-1900? Do they have to be written in dense prose or the author from the Victorian era? I just finished reading Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman for the second time and in all honesty is one of the most simply written books I have ever read, and yet is deep, thoughtful, fun and I can probably say is more enjoyable than some of those you call classics. Where do we draw the line?

Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman

I love this book! Its entertaining, interesting and inspiring.

I am a big time Feynman fan, sure we've had our share of great thinkers and awe inspiring intellects, but Feynman is just the perfect combination of that and a likable character that remains human for the rest of us. Einstein was also like that in many ways but he was the child of another time and while he was always humane and simple, Feynman was much more likable, full of funny and witty anecdotes that connect with people. Also if you have not seen Feynman lecturing on Physics then you haven't seen a great educator, see [1] and [2], just plain wonderful.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3pYRn5j7oI

[2] http://research.microsoft.com/apps/tools/tuva/

There are ways to tell which books are classics, but sadly you need to wait for a few centuries: if some people still feel the need to read a book after some centuries, it is an indicator that this book is a classic.

so Bill Gates should read the Quran in his spare time?

If he wants. But he could also read Marcus Aurelius, Plato, etc.

Or the Analects of Confucius, or some recently written novels, or the Quixote...

Are you referring to Jane Austen? As influential and ubiquitous as her books are, I rarely find myself considering her one of the great classic authors.

Either way, I'm sure he's read his share of the classics. The entire notion of "classics" is a fluid concept anyhow. The past, after all, doesn't have an exclusive monopoly on great and meaningful literary work. 100 years from now there will hopefully have been new texts added to our collective repertoire.

Yes, some books written today will be considered classics in 100 years but I'd bet none will be of the kind Gates read during his vacations.

nonfiction books rarely become "classics", that doesn't mean they're not important or worth reading.

Maybe we don't have the same definition for classics. To me the Bible is a classic, as are the Pensées de Pascal, or the Daodejing, or Shakespeare.

Shouldn't the fact that one of the most accomplished and driven persons of this era isn't reading "real books" be a bit telling about "real books" themselves?

Edit: thanks for the downvote, ...

That's an interesting question, but I fear this fact is more telling about our era. In other times any great person would have read and read again Plato, Aristotle and the like. I don't think it is very likely that those classics which have been considered useful for so many people during such a long period are magically not useful anymore. Maybe it's just because what we consider important people are not that important.

Side note, Paul Graham is likely to be more interested in philosophy and "real books" than in those ego building books you find in airports.

Why are you so sure he hadn't have read all those in his 20's? And didn't it occur to you that those "real" books may just be real for you only?

I bet he doesn't even listen to classical music either. What a pleb.

Disturbing -- I hope not!

But revealing, sure. Gates is a genius, but he is not in the cultural vanguard. He hired Ballmer, for chrissake.

The point of reading anything is to ingest a certain type of content. He chose the desired content and read it. The books he read were educational. Why should he ensure that a certain percentage of his books are "classics"? He could have gotten a lot (most? all?) of that information from various resources online, but the authors bundled it together into a book.

Maybe the books won't be classics in 100 years, but the information in them will either still be relevant then or will have shaped what society looks like by then.

> The point of reading anything is to ingest a certain type of content.

What an awful definition of reading. I do occasionally read books on this purely utilitarian basis, but reading is also done for other reasons, for example because you are completely engrossed in the story and just can't stop reading.

I'm using a more formal definition of "information". I don't mean trivia, facts, or geeky stuff, I mean "content". You read because you want to take in a certain type of content, be it a fantasy story, geek trivia, math, or tear-jerking romance. The definition is true pretty much by definition so long as the reading is self-motivated.

In that light it may seem like a silly-obvious thing to point out, but the statement I was replying to was implying a more narrow motivation for reading.

> I find it very disturbing and revealing that such a high level and respected guy did read no real book, I mean real books that will be read in 50 years, literature or philosophy, or classics like Seneque, Proust, Montaigne, Austeen.

Bill Gates is reading about how much college students learn in college instead of reading Kant and sipping wine by his fireplace and being a pretentious douche-bag.

Oh, the horror. What has the world come to.

EDIT: If it didn't occur to you, the definitions of real, classic and important are different for a random punk on an internet forum and Bill Gates. Also, Bill Gates doesn't seem like a guy who would read classics so that he can make blog posts about it.

"Bill Gates is reading about how much college students learn in college instead of reading Kant and sipping wine by his fireplace and being a pretentious douche-bag."

I understand your point, but, I can't help recognising the irony given the key findings of the book mentioned.

I take your point, but there books that are hundreds or thousands of years old that still help to illuminate the human condition and that people can learn from - Shakespeare, Plutarch, Herodotus etc.

I'd take those over some buzzword laden piece of Gladwell-lite that will be irrelevant in five years.

> I take your point, but there books that are hundreds or thousands of years old that still help to illuminate the human condition and that people can learn from - Shakespeare, Plutarch, Herodotus etc.

I don't know what you are responding to. I didn't claim there aren't old books which are useful. I am taking exception to the unfounded claim about old classics being the real books. Personally, I find Shakespeare trash. I would rather re-read "Lord of the flies" or "To kill a mockinbird" than subjecting myself to the Shakespearean torture.

> I'd take those over some buzzword laden piece of Gladwell-lite that will be irrelevant in five years.

Tell me how Bill Gates reading about college students not getting much out of education(and actually acting on it) is not better by eons to Bill Gates reading Hamlet. How does it matter no one will remember about "state of education in the 21st century" 100 years down the road?

gbog sounds a bit like the main character from Verne's Paris au XXe siècle, a classics scholar who is shunned for searching for timeless truth in a modernist, materialist world that focuses only on technology and business.

The classics are classics for a reason: they are universal and timeless, and contain deep truths about the human condition that resonate forever. If Gates had read them early in life, maybe he would not have developed the predatory personality that characterized his business career and Microsoft in general?

Yes, that's my point, and the anti-culture trend I can feel on HN, while somewhat justified, because there are culture douche in some places, is missing the bigger picture: culture, classic books, and so on, are the only way to build a better world.

> and the anti-culture trend I can feel on HN

What do you mean by anti-culture trend?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture

Of all the definitions listed here, what on earth would anti-culture mean? This is the 20th century definition:

In the 20th century, "culture" emerged as a central concept in anthropology, encompassing the range of human phenomena that cannot be attributed to genetic inheritance. Specifically, the term "culture" in American anthropology had two meanings: (1) the evolved human capacity to classify and represent experiences with symbols, and to act imaginatively and creatively; and (2) the distinct ways that people living in different parts of the world classified and represented their experiences, and acted creatively.

If by culture, you mean the practices which have been followed for some time(won't that be tradition?), count me in as anti culture and tradition. "Something exists for a long time, hence it is useful" is bullshit. Culture and traditions are mostly dynamic, and people who think of a them as a static rather than ever changing snapshot of current human behavior are some of the biggest, bigoted assholes I have ever seen.

> culture, classic books, and so on, are the only way to build a better world.

Do you have anything other than your personal opinion to back up culture(whatever that means) or classic books building better world?

There is another meaning: culture is what a cultivated man has. I think this meaning is continental, French and German. It is something one person gains with time by broadening his familiarity with the best products of the human mind, like classic books, paintings, etc.

> There is another meaning: culture is what a cultivated man has.

Cultivated as in "educated and refined"? And somehow who doesn't give a shit about Kant isn't educated or refined?

> It is something one person gains with time by broadening his familiarity with the best products of the human mind, like classic books, paintings, etc.

Expanding your horizons is good. Claiming reading obscure books is the way towards a better world is douchebaggery.

> gbog sounds a bit like the main character from Verne's Paris au XXe siècle, a classics scholar who is shunned for searching for timeless truth in a modernist, materialist world that focuses only on technology and business.

Search for whatever you want - I couldn't care less. But when you come out saying "I read Kant. Look at you simpletons and your not-real-books" then you deserve a slap. Let me re-iterate, no one is stopping you from reading whatever you want. But when you come out categorizing books as real and non-real based on a handful of old books you read, you are a douchebag.

> they are universal and timeless

I am neither universal nor timeless and I have a very limited amount of time which I have to invest accordingly. You carry on with your Hamlet, I will carry on with my "To Kill a mockingbird".

> and contain deep truths about the human condition that resonate forever

And are you assuming these so-called "deep truths" of yours are exclusively found in your 1000 year old obscure books? Care to list me a few of these deep truths?

> If Gates had read them early in life, maybe he would not have developed the predatory personality that characterized his business career and Microsoft in general?

Armchair theorizing much?

Is "how to win friends and influence people" a classic book by your definition?

I think the key thing I takr from his reading list is reading about big current issues. At least he wants to fix things.

It certainly is a classic book. That book has changed more lives than Kant ever had. Everyone should read it, especially people with un/under-developed social skills. It's that great.

Are you serious? Or maybe you mean "directly"? Because Kant certainly changed the life of much more people, but indirectly.

Surprising to me is that Amazon is charging more for the Kindle version than the hard cover of "Awakening Joy" ($19.34 vs $17.16): http://www.amazon.com/Awakening-Joy-Steps-That-Happiness/dp/...

Weird, it's showing up as $15.99 for me.

Seems like there a general trend toward lower pricing transparency in online retail. Airlines have been doing this for years...sucks that it's spreading everywhere.

I find this happening more and more often, quite often I'll have to pay as much as a $5 premium for the digital version.

It's pretty interesting: this was bound to happen since digital copies are no longer the cheap variant that costs nothing to reproduce, but are becoming the more convenient version for which people pay a premium....

Also seeing $15.99 for the Kindle version.

I believe Amazon sets the price for the hardcover, whereas the Kindle version says "this price was set by the publisher".

Yep, Amazon lost the battle with the publishers to price ebooks their way, hence the illogical prices. I own a kindle but I am not purchasing as many books as before. I have found that $5 is sort of a magic number for me, any more than that and I will just skip it, any less and I'll seriously consider buying it if I am interested. Since I do know, more or less, what is going on behind the scenes with the digital distribution model, there is no way I am spending more than that on a digital book, and with DRM added on top.

I find it amazing that Bill Gates seems to still have the time and passion to read books that will help him grow as an individual with everything that he probably has going on in his life and everything he has accomplished. Over the past couple of years, I have personally have had a hard time keeping up with reading habits due to school and job demands. I still read, but look to reading as a relaxing activity as in picking up Game of Thrones for an hour when I have it. I guess that's what makes Bill Gates who he is.

I would think that Bill Gates would have more free time than one who is burdened with school and work.

I, too, don't get as much reading in as I would like.

What? He's a retired multi-billionaire.

If he doesn't have all the time he wants to read whatever he wants, then he's doing something very, very wrong.

I would assume that, given the long history of Bill Gates being intimately involved in many aspects of Microsoft, that he has a particular talent for taking written material and absorbing it at a very fast rate (look for Joel Spolsky's story about Date functions in Excel).

That's the sort of skill which never diminishes. I bet Bill G can absorb a relatively short book at a very fast speed, especially if he's on vacation with large blocks of reading time available.

Thanks for posting this! I look forward to reading Bill's full review of Academically Adrift - higher education is ripe for the disrupt.

It's amusing to see Bill Gates upset about college students not learning much and many not finishing. He's a billionaire. But he's also a dropout. And now he's reading self-help books.

I'd like to see Bill Gates go back to school and earn a degree or two. Is that a bad thing to do? Why? He obviously has the time and money. But how dare I even suggest the idea? Who am I compared to Bill Gates? A mere plebian. So why would I suggest it? Beause it would be a great example to set. In my opinion. Not sure if he is a believer in setting examples and the tendency of young people to emulate "role models". Like, e.g., billionaire dropouts.

That would also be a good way for him to see what college is really like, since he is so intent on fixing it.

(I'm a dropout too)

The academically adrift book was quite interesting, although I disagree with the conclusion. For the most part, I find the first two years of college are really more about filtering out those who are there to party and those who are there to learn and get a degree. If the same results were achieved on third or fourth year students (assuming most students are in for 5 years these days), then I would be concerned.

What's curious is that none of the links to the books are on Amazon. I wonder if he did that intentionally.

All of them go to the publisher - which seems a bit odd.

Other than the fact that the Publisher's link is 'more right' to link to, it may just be the fact that Amazon's a competitor in the tablet space.

I know it may be 'more right'...but if some random 'tech famous person' were writing this post, which links would they use? More likely than not, they would use Amazon's links.

This seems like it took extra effort to look for these titles on each of their publisher's sites.

"I know it may be 'more right'...but if some random 'tech famous person' were writing this post, which links would they use? More likely than not, they would use Amazon's links."

I don't think Bill Gates needs the referral link revenue from Amazon ;)

I wasn't alluding to affiliate revenue. Rather just an easier experience for users.

I also doubt that Gates worries about finding links for his blog. He probably has microserfs to do that for him.

Makes sense to me. Link to the source when you can. "Give credit where it's due" and all that. People can go to Amazon or other distributors on their own if they so wish.

Yeah, what a dope. He should set up an affiliate account. He'll never get rich at this rate.

Is there a HN filter to weed out "rich man has opinions" type stories?

> Is there a HN filter to weed out "rich man has opinions" type stories?

Yes. The title says "rich man has opinions". Don't click the link, don't read the comments and don't post comments about how you didn't want to see this.

The closest "filter" I know of is: whenever you dislike the frontpage contents, go upvote something better.

On Kindle Store:

A Nation of Wusses: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007OWRBEK/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...

Moonwalking with Einstein: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004H4XI5O/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...

The Art of being Unreasonable: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007WLU96A/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...

Academically Adrift: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004LE9ILS/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...

Awakening Joy: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0030DHPDO/ref=as_li_ss_tl?...

The Road Ahead first edition? You know the one where you forgot to mention the world wide web and had to recall it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com