Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Unfortunately, I cannot read technical books fast and definitely not fast enough to make the subscription be worth $500 per year.

For me I find the $500 to be a pretty clear win as far as value goes. My shelves are already overflowing with, while not "timeless", much slower aging technical books. But quite often, throughout a year, I'll want a deeper dive into a current topic than I can get from online resources + Claude. Quite often that dive involves wanting to look through multiple books (even if only using a few chapters).

I know I'm a dying breed, but, while I love AI for interactive exploration and learning, I find books more valuable in the era of endless YouTube tutorials and AI slop blog posts. Technical topics benefit from "big picture" thinking that basically doesn't exist in modern short-form web content.





Books still activate a different part of the brain than reading on a screen, including e-ink, so it's not you or a dying breed, people may turn out to not learn as deeply or as quickly.

I had kinda suspected this just based on my own experience of paper vs screen, but hadn’t run across any research.

After seeing your comment I went looking! I found this interesting: https://phys.org/news/2024-02-screens-paper-effective-absorb...


That was one of the studies that I saw too.

There's some others about learning more from writing with pen on paper compared to tablet or taking notes digitally typing.

I am a digital note taker at heart but can't deny using a notebook still has better outcomes sometimes.


Probably true but I'm not going to lug 10 textbooks onto a plane.

For sure, that would be a backpack that is too big as a carry on.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: