If you have something open because you need to finish a task... Put the task explicitly on your todo list, set a reminder, and close the tab.
If you have something open that you are need to finish reading reading but don't immediately have the time? Add it to your Pocket or alternative, and close the tab. If you feel you might forget it, set a calendar reminder to follow-up.
If you have something open that you think might just be nice to reference for that project you're kinda tinkering on... Summarize your finding in a way that would be meaningful to a future-you searching for that reference. You can do this in whatever method you prefer (bookmark, txt file, journal, pocket, etc.) And finally, close the tab!
In my personal experience having tabs open for weeks, to years on end did nothing more than exacerbate my anxiety over the fear of somehow missing out or loosing that information.
Give your working brain a rest and externalize this effort onto something that you aren't constantly being reminded of every second you're using the browser.
If you're worried about not finishing something, give yourself deadlines and set reminders.
If you're worried about not finding something, make it easier for a future-you to find it.
OneTab's features for organizing and prioritizing are so much better when you're dealing with hundreds/thousands of tabs. Also you can browse by the date a tab group was added on.
I've been collecting for a number of years now, and interestingly, when I sort oldest to newest, I have a really interesting window into what I thought was important/newsworthy at that time and what I know to be important/newsworthy or timeless now. I wonder if I can use that information to help sharpen my own judgment?
As usual, this is an amazing trove of interesting links and top notch personal accounting. Thank you, fogus!
The site is also getting an overhaul with a new name in April which will have even more powerful searches.
The new rewrite will have an API, though I am not sure what the stack will be.
If you meant the place where you find music in RYM, here:
I would say that another good place to find music is user lists. For example, here's one of non-Anglo pre-WWII music:
I find it to be the one article I can link to people that has a profound impact on the way they think about web app development.
After thinking of it in those terms, I've started to apply the idea that the more I read, the faster I will read (up to a point), to actively avoid subvocalization, and to devote real blocks of time to reading instead of fitting it in at the edges. I find that I end up reading closer to 400 wpm during focused time, and when I want to, I'm able to average 1-2 hours/day of a week. Spending that much time at 400ish words per minute makes books fly past. Keeping comprehension up and realizing value is where taking some notes comes into it.
Beyond that, as he says, you have to know what you're reading a book for. For example, it's probably not worth reading the introduction and basic content chapters of technical books you're already up-to-speed on, and you can skip right to the important parts and just read them deeply.
i feel like for stuff like novels the vocalization & imagined richness of the world is kind of part of the point, and for technical material, grasping the ideas is by far going to be the limiting factor. (e.g., easy to spend an hour on 1 page of a math text.)
I can't read without subvocalization... I tried keeping my mind preoccupied with gibberish words and even thinking in a foreign language but a second voice chimes in with the words as I'm reading them in the background. This is also quickly mentally exhausting...
I don't consider myself a slow reader - as I speedread at 700~800wpm. The subvocalization merely happens by slurring words together as if playing a movie on x3 Fast Forward w/ sound. I'm not capable of seeing how it hurts the rate of reading. I could see voicing or actually reading aloud to slow down reading, but not this.
is there a website to test reading speed + comprehension? i'm thinking something w/ like an auto-generated story of fixed elements ("a pig and a horse visit the blue house on the hill", "a donkey and an ostrich cross the bridge over a river"), or maybe just a sampling of a large corpus of real text of similar level. you get timed on how long it takes you to read it + given a basic test to see if you actually absorbed it.
would be interesting to get some numbers, and also see if these (mythical?) non-subvocalizers really are faster.
i think i could see it maybe working, but i also feel like the words would be taking a whole new path through my brain. almost like a new language.
(reply up here because i guess i hit some hn karma limit on replying or something :/.)
Absolutely true! I don't read much math, but I have and my reading rate was much slower. There have been a few books over the past year that took me months to get through whereas most others took a matter of days. I read a few books in parallel though.
Here's confessions of someone who read 164:
Blogger/economist Tyler Cowan also advises quitting books that are a slog.
That's about right. I spend about 2-hours per week on television (depending on the season I spend zero) and I haven't played a video game in 5 years. There have been many times that I've wanted to see certain shows (Supergirl looked fun) but when the time comes reading wins out almost every time. I can only read this much because I love reading more than any other form of entertainment. It would be impossible otherwise. It does kinda stink to never be able to engage in conversations about games and shows though. Maybe there's a market for semi-annual books about current media. ;)
2 books per week was an amount that makes me happy, so I kept up with it easily. I fell behind early this year because my wife and I wanted to catch up on a couple of TV shows, which meant I needed to average over 2.5 books per week. That was enough to kill part of the fun, which is why I've struggled.
A goal is great because it helps you get started on the next book when you might want to do something easier. But if it's too big it just makes reading a chore.
It is very true that the more you read, the faster and better you get at it. I always read more than one book at one time - and I read only things I find interesting. I find fiction very uninteresting and that is why I do not read it, even though a lot of people give me shit for it.
Edit: It's been on his "Still Haven't Read" list since 2010. Maybe it's some sort of inside joke at this point...
For me anything fictional gets pushed so far to the bottom of the list compared to everything else that's on my to read list that I have had books sitting on shelves for 10+ years just waiting to eventually get read.
I thought it was more fun than Snow Crash.
I have been thinking about genius box, the young scientist club, explorabox, and agent ribbit, too. There is so much overlap in a lot of these that it's difficult to commit to multiple without just ending up with duplicates. That probably wouldn't be entirely bad, but it's mildly annoying. Also, not all of these get down to the 3-4 yr range, but maybe something to think about in the context of the impending TinkerCrate subscription.
Maybe a figure like Gaudi came close to being the ideal STEAM all-rounder. Whether we need more of his type I don't know!
at which point we're back to "education is good" and we've cancelled the whole point of the STEM concept in the first place.
The effort toward productivity, the 100:10:1 rule.
Pretty good stuff.
I'm the same way. Friends and students are endlessly amazed that I'm reading a new book every couple days. I'm endlessly amazed at how much time they spend on their phones.
A while ago I wrote "Why fiction? Why reading?" http://jakeseliger.com/2014/03/03/why-fiction-why-reading/ :
Every great book is the result of years or decades of studying and experience, distilled into a volume you can read in a few hours. How could you not want that?
I enjoy reading to a ridiculous degree and do so quite often. As a result, I can typically finish a 400-page book in 2-3 days, averaging a couple hours each day. I'm at the faster end of the scale among people I know, though. A free weekend (which is extremely rare with two young kids) usually gives me the time to finish 3 or 4 books on my ever-growing list of fiction to read.
Anyone know where we can get the data for this? It seems to come from the Nielson corporation, who might be biased in the direction of implying people watch more TV. The BLS says 2.8 hours per day:
...I'd like to see the histogram of this data. Is it normally distributed? What's the standard deviation? How many people are watching more than 16 hours per day. How many are at zero per day? What the median? How does it break down for different demographics? How about with the seasons? How does it look over the course of a week? Are people binge watching on the weekends?
Ryan Holiday had a great post about this very topic: http://ryanholiday.net/how-to-read-more-a-lot-more/