Do not read the books
Do not read books. Read articles, blogs, forums on the net, read those things that convey the essence and to which you can leave feedback. This thesis is relevant for 2018. In the future, the first part (about books) is likely to remain relevant. But I'm not sure about articles and blogs.
However, the question is: why not read books? It's not for nothing that
millions of flies
a lot of people brag about "I read the book XXX", and then ask "what books did you read today"? Well, for good reason do articles like " How to read 40 books in the year ", " .7 things about books and life that I learned after reading 100 books for the year " And so on.
And the answer is the time in which we live. After all, this thesis (especially about blogs) would have been more erroneous at the beginning of the XIX century.
Psychiatric hospital in the hands of patients or The mythical man-month .
Have you ever been surprised that in articles on Wikipedia, in scientific articles, and also in articles on Habr much higher frequency of references to facts? It would seem that the difficult - every fact to reinforce the link?
Here is the text from the first chapter of the book The mythical man-month (under the link - page 11):
From time to time you can read in the newspaper about how in a converted garage a couple of programmers made a wonderful program that left behind the development of large teams. And every programmer willingly believes in these tales, because he knows that he can create any program at a speed well above those 1000 operators a year that programmers in industrial teams reportedly write.
Tell me, what from this text is an indisputable fact? Was it difficult for the author to add a reference to becoming a newspaper? And on "every programmer willingly believes in fairy tales" and so on? There are almost no links in the books, since
if to reinforce each fact by reference, the arguments of the author of the book will obviously be false
. In the case of the book, the reader can not object to the author in the comments, the reader can only close the book after the first paragraph. Well, or start believing, faith sometimes starts with books .
Admit, will you sign under each sentence from the paragraph above? Or do you recommend using the words "some programmers" instead of "every programmer"?
I will repeat the part of the thesis:
read articles, blogs, forums on the net, read those things that convey the essence and to which you can leave feedback.
In books you do not write a comment, you will not reproach. And the author knows this very well. The author can always come up with, embellish. Gonzo-journalism appeared in offline editions where it is impossible to write that the facts are wrong.
In articles on Habré the author knows that a false commentary will fly to any false attack. Therefore, articles with outright lies are rare. Moreover, as a reader, I know that many mistakes will be corrected thanks to feedback, which is not available in offline articles. Example: in the material about MikroTik RB2011 the author made a mistake about IPSec, which was quickly fixed good Maloi3390 .
Another example is the product The archipelago of the Gulag Alexander Solzhenitsyn. Let me remind you that this author himself calls the "Experience of artistic research", to immediately note the lack of documentary in it. And now the facts:
In Wikipedia (which is in 3 r3r315? Russian
, That in
) The article on the Gulag is still being discussed. The figures are verified, the sources are found, and so on.
On the public site lurkmore there is a discussion Alexander himself, the facts are verified, corrected.
In the book itself there is no discussion of figures. The author gives them with scant references to sources, often embellishing.
We get that
in comparison with Internet publications with feedback, books have much less certainty
2. There is a decline of the old journalism. Earlier, writers wrote, now specialists
And the most interesting is who writes books, who writes journal articles and who writes articles on topics on the Internet?
In order not to delay the discussion, the theses:
most of the non-trivial articles on the Internet are written by experts and eyewitnesses, whereas most journal articles and books are written by writers
the specialist will not want to pour water into his studies, he will write the essence. The journalist is paid for symbols and scandals, he pours water
Yes, no one argues that there are books from specialists (but rather memoirs). And there are online articles written by people who only retell the words of experts. And there are bloated articles, in the subject of which "programming MK", and in the text - "what a bad middle manager".
In the description above, the word "non-trivial" should be interpreted as "having at least minimal information value for the reader". The word is necessary to cut off empty publications in the style of I and my cat . For example, articles from Drebin893 on the move to Germany and from sith about electromobiles for me they were not trivial, as I learned new and valuable for myself.
However, the list, for comparison:
Technician lozga writes about the cosmos, about the technical topic. Not the journalist Latynina, with literary education , but a techie. Therefore, there are fewer blunders.
Milfgard gives advice on the conduct of retail business. He does this himself, he tells. In contrast, the famous writer of the investment Robert Kiyosaki, author of books on investing , in reality turned out to be a bad investor, and the main capital earned as a writer. For that and is criticized .
The writer Martin Fowler (you remember the book about refactoring ) in github consider that there is no code . The biography does not even list the projects where he worked. But it is written about his books. Otherwise -
one of the most famous authors of books on programming is not known as a programmer
. In contrast, citizen DreamWalker just has a repository on github, moreover - managed to make useful for many - BenchmarkDotNet .
The list can be continued, but it turns out incredibly surprising -
a huge number of authors of famous books became famous only as authors of well-known books
. The maximum of their achievements is work in a large corporation. We can not assess in any way how much you can trust their experience at all.
However, in the books of these "authors" there is a greater flaw - this is a bloated narrative. For comparison - if you read the story False blindness , then remember the volume of the text that told about the Chinese room. Compare with article in Wikipedia .
Literators like to pay for volume from the written - see as an example Amazon will pay authors of books for how many pages in their books are read by the buyer . On the contrary,
a specialist who writes an article wants to convey the essence of
as briefly as possible. .
What is the conclusion?
read articles, blogs, forums on the net, read those things that convey the essence and to which you can leave feedback. Do not read books.
Do not take information from sources that you can not just blame for deception. They have no incentive to verify the references to evidence. On the contrary, they have a great temptation to embellish the problem, raise themselves, advertise their next works.
Try to get information "from the first mouth", from specialists, and not from writers. You are not the XIX century, now almost everyone can write an article.
Skip the materials in which the author does not respond. You should have a dialogue with the author, you, as the reader, should be able to ask a question, fix the mistake. It is not necessary to communicate with the authors "on the Olympus," they will not give anything useful.
I will be extremely happy if you write in the comments both agreement with the article and references to the opposite (research, etc.). Still, the main thing in this article is to submit and try to justify the idea that the world has changed, and the books have lost the sacred meaning.
It may be interesting