Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)E
Posts
4
Comments
1075
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • If you asked me a few years ago I would have told you a PS5 easy as a big PlayStation fan.

    But the way prices are these days, and Sony’s growing disdain for its users, and lack of competition from Xbox, you should 100% just get a PC.

  • “HugeNerd”

    “Ok so that was a fucking lie”

  • One of the few things Reddit had going for it that anyone’s grandmother understood is that it was synonymous with organic user content (Even if that’s not entirely true). There’s a reason adding site:Reddit.com to Google searches was a meme, and it’s that you could get more organic feedback on things as opposed to the hellscape that was the open internet “listicles”.

    When Reddit closed itself off from the internet at large by forcing app usage, and embracing AI which just made their bot problem worse, it legitimately removed the one thing it was actually good for.

  • Overall, the researchers found that reading and listening were about equally effective for understanding information.

    There you go. Glad you finally got there.

    Again, no mention of testing in distracted settings.

    Why would they do that? Add confounding factors to their study?

  • You literally didn’t even read or comprehend the studies I sent you my man lmao

  • What I sent you comprises nearly 50 different studies over a 70 year span and over 4,000 participants from elementary school age to adults, in a variety of environments and tested for comprehension and retention of the information specifically, the exact thing your comment is based on, and the findings were that there is no real difference between the two.

    The irony of you making a case for the superiority of reading written words for comprehension and I sent you two written sources and you absorbed and comprehended almost none of it. Like, would it have helped if I sent them to you in audio form instead?

  • Lmao you skimming just the first study and not comprehending it at all is not helping your case for reading over listening. Of course you control for outside variables when you compare two things, that’s how studies work.

    I mean if you can refute 70 years of studies and the current scientific consensus be my guest, but the data we have does not support your opinion at all.

  • You think people did studies for decades on this in order to troll this one Lemmy user?

  • I’ve seen people read books. When I ask them, they can’t even tell me what happened in the last 5 minutes, and in some cases, can’t recall a single significant detail of what they read throughout the entire book. So from an unverified anecdotal standpoint I think it’s a wash.

    However there have been dozens of studies on this topic over the last 70 years. One of the more significant recent studies was This one where they looked at brain scans of people reading and listening to audiobooks and found that the brain activity between the two different kinds of readers was the same, down to the specific region of the brain.

    The most comprehensive meta-analysis of these studies found that there was no reliable difference in comprehension or retention between the modes of reading, which proves both our anecdotes are just statistical outliers and not indicative of any real innate difference.

  • This sentiment has been repeated a couple times in this thread but I’m not sure where it comes from as it’s entirely false.

    For most people, it becomes a "passive" activity instead of an active one, so you rarely retain the information

    This is worded as an established fact despite the fact that this has been studied in the past and disproven entirely.

    On a skills level, you're not practicing the act of looking at glyphs and words and translating them into meaning.

    This is the only thing with any truth to it. You’re right that in order to get better at the ability of visually reading something, you have to practice this step of decoding written words into meaning, but I also don’t think it’s relevant at all to the core process of “reading”. Once the decoding step is over, whether it’s visual or auditory, all the actual comprehension and processing that your brain does is identical.

  • There’s no real difference outside of your personal preferences or abilities. I read physical books, e-books, and audiobooks. Often I’ve both read and listened to the exact same book at different times. I’ve even split my reading of a single book between methods on the fly.

    Ultimately for me, I can comprehend what I’m reading better with an audiobook because there are fewer physical distractions like my eyes focusing, poor typography, or getting a little sleepy when trying to read at night. But under perfect conditions, I can read faster than I could listen. I also don’t have an inner monologue so I can’t actually “hear” people talking in my head when I’m reading spoken language in books, so when reading for pleasure, audiobooks add a little extra life into a story for me.

  • That cuts equally both ways. You could skim through a book without slowing down to intently focus on every single sentence and that would be functionally the same as drifting your attention in and out while listening to an audiobook.

  • That’s more of an issue personal to you. I can focus a lot better while listening than I can while reading. For similarly personal reasons.

  • They’ve done studies on this that have actually found the opposite. There is little to no functional difference between reading a physical book and listening to an audiobook in the brain. Once the decoding stage of reading concludes and the stage where you assign meaning to and between words begins, the process is the same between methods. There’s no change in understanding or retention.

  • That’s not how Google’s crawlers or search indexing work. If you configure your site properly, you won’t have this problem Anthropic’s had. This is an amateur move by Anthropic

  • That’s actually not how Google works. This was Anthropics screwup

  • They’ll be a startup until they start making a profit (if)

  • This isn’t circular financing. They will sell more than they’ll invest and that money does not disappear when the bubble pops.

  • Is the piefed dev a baddie too? Boy am I out of the loop