[HN Gopher] How We Read Now
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How We Read Now
        
       Author : vitabenes
       Score  : 31 points
       Date   : 2022-09-30 19:56 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (charlesschifano.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (charlesschifano.substack.com)
        
       | nottorp wrote:
       | Popup asking me to subscribe to the newsletter with no visible
       | way to close it. Could not read the article.
        
       | fedeb95 wrote:
       | What you say about some writing today is true, but beware of the
       | bubble effect of social networks and the internet: not everyone
       | reads or writes like you do, and just because the set of people
       | famous now doesn't intersect with those still writing and reading
       | conventional books doesn't tell you anything about the future.
       | Truth is, bad writing has always been wrote, there was throwaway
       | writing also in ancient Rome for instance, which was something
       | like (but not quite) our newspapers. And again, newspapers came,
       | book persisted. Smartphones came... books are persisting.
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | What's more important from this article, to me, is that things
         | that are written today are not stable - they can and do change
         | as the engagement with them is measured and interpreted.
        
           | the_af wrote:
           | But are _books_ malleable, though?
           | 
           | Are we comparing articles, opinions and news (mostly
           | impermanent, at least by intention) with books and treatises
           | (mostly permanent)? Or is this about how we index supposedly
           | permanent stuff, i.e. "the library" where we store it?
           | 
           | I'm confused because the article starts with Herodotus and
           | the alleged elegance and permanence of his works; but
           | Herodotus was a historian, not an influencer. We still have
           | historians and writers in this day and age; aren't their
           | works as "permanent"?
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | Ebooks are absolutely malleable. New versions and patches
             | are applied behind the scenes by publishers on a regular
             | basis. And less frequently, these books are removed from
             | publication completely, including pulling them from
             | readers.
             | 
             | And given that even physical books have multiple releases
             | with changes, they are not exactly written in stone either.
             | 
             | Whether this should be allowed is a topic in and of itself.
        
               | the_af wrote:
               | But by your own admission, ebooks are malleable in the
               | same sense that books always were: later editions fixing
               | typos, removing or adding chapters, even dealing with
               | censorships issues! This was also true in Herodotus'
               | time. People in ancient times also had to deal with
               | censorship, only it was enforced by sword or fire instead
               | of by removing from digital storage.
               | 
               | It's only made _technically easier_ with ebooks, but this
               | is nothing new or extraordinary.
               | 
               | Ebooks are not malleable in the sense I think the author
               | meant, of impermanence and of being specifically tailored
               | for your living-in-a-bubble preferences. At least not
               | now, who knows in the future?
        
               | falcolas wrote:
               | I think the notable difference is that ebook alterations
               | most often occur without user input (buying a new
               | version, downloading a new version) and without notifying
               | the user (no alerts, no version increments, or release
               | dates).
               | 
               | As for the "tailored for each user", we do have proof
               | that some personalization can and is made for ebooks
               | (DRM, buyer's name). Is the content itself being
               | tailored? I believe it is (with the caveat of I have no
               | evidence). I think some censorship for sales to Russia,
               | China, et.al. is being done transparently.
        
               | the_af wrote:
               | I agree ebook technology could be used for this in
               | totalitarian states. But is that the argument of TFA? I
               | don't think that's the case he's making, I don't see
               | malicious intent in what he describes.
               | 
               | I _think_ my Kindle notifies me when there 's an update
               | of a novel. This could of course be subverted. But are we
               | ready to claim this is what happens to the majority of
               | e-novels? I don't think it is. I'm also willing to bet
               | that _so far_ no novel in my Kindle has been edited with
               | changes specifically tailored for me by an algorithm
               | (meaningful text changes, I mean. I don 't mean the book
               | cover or DRM or whatever, and neither does the author of
               | the TFA. That's why he talks about the _elegance of
               | words_ , which has nothing to do with DRM!).
               | 
               | This could change and I absolutely see a dystopian future
               | where this can happen. But my understanding is that the
               | author is describing the situation _now_ , and I just
               | don't see it.
        
               | falcolas wrote:
               | > I just don't see it.
               | 
               | Because you've focused on one kind of writing: books. The
               | original article was more broadly scoped.
        
       | feoren wrote:
       | How We Write Now: pretentiously, with heapings of bullshit,
       | apparently.
       | 
       | > as the writing in our century, it seems, comes in sentences
       | that are a tad more malleable, with the age of permanence pretty
       | much at its end
       | 
       | Does the author even care if this has any resemblance to truth,
       | or does he just think it makes him sound smart? The age of
       | permanence is at its end? What is he even talking about? Is
       | literally anything he says in this article backed by any sort of
       | research or evidence?
       | 
       | This is a good example of the Uncanny Valley just before actual
       | interesting writing. If it were a few Twitter sentences or a
       | snarky YouTube comment it might be boiled down to an actual point
       | or two. But clearly this author is too good for such philistine
       | methods of writing. No, he's much, much better than you are, you
       | Twitter users. He's a _writer_. A writer with absolutely nothing
       | to write about, apparently. So he fills an article with almost-
       | intelligent-sounding language and unsubstantiated claims and
       | derisive assumptions about you and everyone else and  "society"
       | and "kids these days" and shakes his fist at some cloud we're not
       | even sure is really there and fails to make a single rational
       | point along the way. And then he preemptively insults you for not
       | reading the whole thing, as if this somehow proves him right.
        
         | the_af wrote:
         | I think the article definitely overstates its case.
         | 
         | It's not true (or common, at least) that you can discover
         | anything by skimming through random shelves in a library.
         | Libraries are big and this method is unlikely to expose you to
         | the whole range of diverse ideas and works out there; you'll
         | just find some, possibly filtered by your own choice of library
         | sections.
         | 
         | I do enjoy browsing the shelves of used book stores, though!
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | As stated in TFA - with an emphasis on news articles - article
         | titles, and the articles themselves are being modified in real
         | time as the metrics collected with the article are aggregated
         | and interpreted.
         | 
         | We also see this with titles for YouTube videos, taking down
         | social media videos which don't get much attention to create a
         | specific narrative, and so forth.
         | 
         | In other words, the media of today is not static, even once
         | publicly published.
        
         | jasode wrote:
         | _> , comes in sentences that are a tad more malleable, _
         | 
         | _> What is he even talking about?_
         | 
         | The _" malleable"_ is referencing his later paragraphs about
         | SEO A/B testing of headlines[1] and dynamically generated text
         | of news by A.I. based on your personal data.
         | 
         | Unfortunately, his writing style doesn't make it easy for
         | readers to extract his main idea.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=a%2Fb+testing+headlines
        
       | pards wrote:
       | Here's the TL;DR;
       | 
       | > you'll have a difficult time stumbling upon anything outside
       | your current awareness on most screens
        
       | DerekBickerton wrote:
       | You can distill the gist of a book down to a few notable
       | paragraphs which you then memorize and integrate into your life.
       | I've done it with 100s of books. You have to read the entire book
       | though, so you can't really cheat here by skimming, then cherry
       | picking something interesting. There is a fallacy that whole
       | books have to be inculcated into your life. In my case, a
       | paragraph will do.
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | Isn't that what Cliff's Notes do? Are they still a thing?
         | That's what got me through High School English lit.
        
           | ar0b wrote:
           | I've seen this advertised as a similar option for books and
           | podcasts. https://www.blinkist.com/en I haven't used it
           | though, so can't vouch for it's effectiveness.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | jf___ wrote:
       | tl;dr
        
         | politelemon wrote:
         | Subtle but succinct
        
       | gavinsyancey wrote:
       | > If Herodotus can ask 2,400 years ago for immortality while
       | striving to prevent his subject from being "forgotten in time",
       | then perhaps it is not too presumptuous for me, more than two
       | millennium later, to ask you to read for five minutes
       | 
       | If you're going to have a pop-up asking for my email as soon as I
       | scroll the page, yes it is.
        
       | Markoff wrote:
       | I really dislike newsletter popups which don't have X button to
       | close (I'm aware there is hidden unintuitive text button), so I'm
       | not gonna read this.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-03 23:02 UTC)