|
Do you know how fast you can write on a keyboard? You can write like 180 words per minute. Do you know how fast you can read? No faster than you read in 319 BC.
No matter how fast we write we'll always read at the same speed. Some people literally read at 200 WPM. That's the average person and they do it with 60% comprehension. That means they're literally reading as fast as I type.
Do you know most people literally read at the same speed I read and write? Can you fucking believe that? I can honest-to-god read a sentence and type the sentence at the same time just as fast the average person can read a sentence.
It's so real dude. I realized that when I was generating 6000 words a day the average person was reading 5 minutes a day. At 120 WPM they were reading literally 720 words of the 6000 I was writing.
 
|
Did you know that you can listen faster than you can talk?
|
But can you reach 180 EAPM?
|
Northern Ireland26402 Posts
Argh, now I have to work out how much of my daily TL output takes and how much of it is actually read by anyone
|
On February 07 2020 19:32 Wombat_NI wrote:
Argh, now I have to work out how much of my daily TL output takes and how much of it is actually read by anyone
Getting a little real for me there...
|
On February 07 2020 19:32 Wombat_NI wrote:
Argh, now I have to work out how much of my daily TL output takes and how much of it is actually read by anyone
I don't have to worry about that, thankfully. I know that Wombat_NI will happen to read my whiskey-fueled rants.
|
Canada8989 Posts
On February 07 2020 19:32 Wombat_NI wrote:
Argh, now I have to work out how much of my daily TL output takes and how much of it is actually read by anyone
I try not to think about it
|
Even with all these limitations on how much we can realistically consume, the trend is to pack as much filler garbage into everything as possible.
|
Should I think some of that and the replies could be linked to me? Probably just me being paranoid.
|
On February 08 2020 04:04 winlessplayer wrote:
Should I think some of that and the replies could be linked to me? Probably just me being paranoid.
My reply is not related to your blogs.
|
Speaking as a failed author, the most important aspect of modern writing is the reality that people can only read so fast. Back when people were writing on palimpsests and editing off texts from other authors, we could read at 120 WPM. Today we can read at 120 WPM. If you write any faster than that you're removing people by standard deviations from the population.
What's important is that to read with more than 100% comprehension we have to read more slowly. To read with full comprehension we might even want to read at 60 WPM. Which means the average person might read at roughly 20 WPM.
The upside to this is if you buy a novel for $9.99 you can read a 200,000 word book for roughly 10,000 minutes
|
On February 08 2020 10:19 linestein wrote:
Speaking as a failed author, the most important aspect of modern writing is the reality that people can only read so fast. Back when people were writing on palimpsests and editing off texts from other authors, we could read at 120 WPM. Today we can read at 120 WPM. If you write any faster than that you're removing people by standard deviations from the population.
What's important is that to read with more than 100% comprehension we have to read more slowly. To read with full comprehension we might even want to read at 60 WPM. Which means the average person might read at roughly 20 WPM.
The upside to this is if you buy a novel for $9.99 you can read a 200,000 word book for roughly 10,000 minutes
What you're saying is ... We need an ELO ranking for reading. Perhaps ebooks can prompt readers after X minutes on events in the book, and if you can't answer them your ranking goes down.
That would also require separate queues for people reading casually and competitively, the former having lower penalties to an unseen 'quick read' rank, alleviated by reading in a book club or with friends.
|
Wow, this is a list of the most dubious "facts" I've ever read.
To make sure have more than 100% comprehension, I read this at 20 WPM.
|
On February 08 2020 18:04 Greth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2020 10:19 linestein wrote:
Speaking as a failed author, the most important aspect of modern writing is the reality that people can only read so fast. Back when people were writing on palimpsests and editing off texts from other authors, we could read at 120 WPM. Today we can read at 120 WPM. If you write any faster than that you're removing people by standard deviations from the population.
What's important is that to read with more than 100% comprehension we have to read more slowly. To read with full comprehension we might even want to read at 60 WPM. Which means the average person might read at roughly 20 WPM.
The upside to this is if you buy a novel for $9.99 you can read a 200,000 word book for roughly 10,000 minutes What you're saying is ... We need an ELO ranking for reading. Perhaps ebooks can prompt readers after X minutes on events in the book, and if you can't answer them your ranking goes down. That would also require separate queues for people reading casually and competitively, the former having lower penalties to an unseen 'quick read' rank, alleviated by reading in a book club or with friends.
A good ELO is just whether you enjoyed what you read. If you read something you did or didn't enjoy and whether it was intense or somehow brought something out of you. You might also consider this is what I did / thought / wrote afterward.
|
Sure you can read pretty fast but you can understand/remember what you are/were reading?
|
On February 09 2020 19:27 Dingodile wrote:
Sure you can read pretty fast but you can understand/remember what you are/were reading?
Why should we listen to someone who got beaten by a dumb bandicoot.
|
People who read fast tend to understand/remember better. In fact, you can say as they can comprehend better, they naturally read faster. Source: purely anaecdotal.
|
On February 12 2020 23:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
People who read fast tend to understand/remember better. In fact, you can say as they can comprehend better, they naturally read faster. Source: purely anaecdotal.
I actually think that's probably true that people who read faster also read more deeply and get more out of what they read. On the other hand I don't know that they're the best authors.
|
Canada8989 Posts
On February 15 2020 06:17 linestein wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2020 23:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
People who read fast tend to understand/remember better. In fact, you can say as they can comprehend better, they naturally read faster. Source: purely anaecdotal. I actually think that's probably true that people who read faster also read more deeply and get more out of what they read. On the other hand I don't know that they're the best authors.
It also depend what kind of material you're reading, obviously if it's more of "informational document" then the more you are used to read on the subject the faster it's gonna be/the easier you will understand it since you already kind of know where it's going, what the format is gonna be, you can make link with other information in your heads ect... It's the trope of the office worker to whom you give a piece of paper, they seems to barely take a second to look at it and got all they need out of it.
I'm not quite sure it's the same with fiction since they generally are less "logical", you can't really follow the writer trail of thought to know if the flowers were tulips or daisy, you just have to read it.
Personally as someone who dabble a bit in more theoretical/philosophical text for my studies, it's remarkable how quickly you begin to be able to read those relatively fast. I remember it used to take me over an hour to get 10 pages, now I probably can do it in 30-40 minutes, faster if it's a subject I know well. Obviously, you always have the risk to lose some stuff the faster you go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
