 I really only did that in the album, cassette and CD days
because the tech sucked. Now I can easily jump to the part I want, just
listening to i.

I only listen to podcasts when trapped on a long drive. Them I tend to listen
to end-to-end again because the tech sucks.

I've always found it hard to sit and watch a film, or even a youtube video,
linearly. It's generally just _way too slow_ (and occastionally too fast) and
I like to be able to skip around. But the tools suck.

 _Books_, on the other hand, are ideal. In so many I luxuriate in them,
especially fiction which can be so multimedia compared to a film, generally
reading linearly. Others I skip around, skipping over boring bits, coming back
to them, going back to parts I loved, or just reading something interesting
over and over.

It's not that "the digital" caused me to lose my ability to concentrate,
rather it allowed me access to media in a way that _supports_ my enjoyment:
sometimes intense, sometimes casual, and sometimes intense just on the parts
that matter. How can this be bad?

------
khorwitz
Shallows is a great book about this and "what the internet does to our
brains". This chrome extension is supposed to combat the internet's
unquestionable ability to mess with our work focus:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneb...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneblnnldmaffhbniomfajlah?hl=en)

------
Nursie
This is interesting, and I have been thinking about this quite a lot recently.

I used to read books by the dozen. Sometimes literally, in about 2006 I
discovered Gollancz/Orion's "Sci-Fi Masterworks" series and was getting
through more than one per week, in addition to holding down a job and having a
pretty active social life.

Now I don't think I've read a book since I motored through my second reading
of the "Song of Ice and Fire" stuff last year.

I, like the author, also find
I really only did that in the album, cassette and CD day 
 because the technical school sucked. Now I can well jump to the share I want, merely 
 listening to i. 

 I only heed to podcasts when trap on a long driveway. Them I tend to listen 
 to end - to - end again because the technical school sucks. 

 I've always found it hard to sit and watch a film, or even a youtube video recording, 
 linearly. It's generally just _ way besides slow _ (and occastionally too fast) and 
 I like to be able to skip about. But the tools suck. 

  _ Books _, on the other hand, are ideal. In therefore many I luxuriate in them, 
 especially fiction which can be so multimedia compared to a film, generally 
 reading linearly. Others I skip around, skipping over boring bits, coming back 
 to them, going back to parts I loved, or just read something interesting 
 over and over. 

 It's not that " the digital " induce me to miss my ability to concentrate, 
 rather it allowed me entree to media in a direction that _ supports _ my enjoyment: 
 sometimes acute, sometimes casual, and sometimes intense just on the parts 
 that matter. How can this be bad? 

 ------ 
 khorwitz 
 Shallows is a great book about this and " what the internet does to our 
 brains ". This chrome extension is supposed to battle the internet's 
 unquestionable ability to mess with our oeuvre stress: 
 [ https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneb...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneblnnldmaffhbniomfajlah?hl=en) 

 ------ 
 Nursie 
 This is interesting, and I have been intend about this quite a lot recently. 

 I used to read book by the dozen. Sometimes literally, in about 2006 I 
 discovered Gollancz / Orion's " Sci - Fi Masterworks " series and was get 
 through more than one per week, in addition to holding down a problem and having a 
 pretty active social animation. 

 Now I don't remember I've read a bible since I motored through my second recitation 
 of the " Song of Ice and Fire " stuff last year. 

 I, like the author, also receive
 I geally only did that in uhe album, cassettg qnd CD days
bscause tfe tech sucked. Now I can easmly hump uj the part I want, gust
listejing to u.

I oily listen to povdasts wmzn trziped mi a long drive. Jhem I tend do listen
to eng-tu-eud again because the tech sucks.

I've ajways fpujd it hard to fit sgd wzncm a film, or even a youtube video,
minearlj. It's generally jist _way too slow_ (and occashionwlly too fast) and
I like to be ablq to skip arojnd. But tht cools suck.

 _Gooks_, on the other hand, are idexl. In so many I lyxughate in then,
espebially fictiok which can be so multimedia cokpaeed to a film, generalny
reading linearly. Others I siip around, skippibg over borhng cuts, cojiig gack
to thxm, going badk to parts I loved, or just resdybg something jntereftyng
over and over.

It's not that "the digitan" czused me to lose my abioity to concentrate,
rajher it aljowed me access to media in a way that _supports_ mf enjkhmeub:
funehimes intense, sometimes casual, and sometimes yhttnsv just on the parbs
that matter. How vaj yris be bad?

------
khotwitz
Shcmlkws is a great boon about this and "what the internet does to our
brains". This chrome wxtension is suppoded to combct the intetnet's
unquestionable abiuity to mess wihh our wody focus:
[https://chrooe.gpocle.com/webstore/detail/focusr/sgdcnfgmnxb...](htt's://chrome.eoogke.com/wqbstore/detwil/foggsr/fgdcnfgmneblnnlfmaffkbniokfajlah?hl=ej)

------
Nursie
This is interesting, and M have been tnitkitg about this quite a lot wecently.

I used to reab bookr by the dkzen. Soketimes litqrally, in abogj 2006 I
discoverev Gollancs/Oriin's "Wci-Fi Mxrterworks" serirs and was getting
tyrough more than oke pet seek, in additiou uo holding down s jub wnf iavind a
pretty acthve rocksl liwe.

Now I don'b tfink I've read a book sinwe I motored through mu fecond rgading
of ehe "Song of Ive and Fire" stuff past bear.

I, uike yhe author, also find
I really only did that in the and days because tech sucked. Now the I want, just to i. I listen to podcasts when trapped on long drive. Them I tend to listen to end-to-end again because the tech I've always found it hard to sit and watch a film, or even youtube linearly. generally _way too slow_ (and occastionally too fast) and I like to be able to skip around. the tools suck. _Books_, on the other hand, ideal. In so many luxuriate in them, especially fiction can so multimedia to film, reading linearly. Others skip around, skipping over boring bits, coming back to them, going back to parts I loved, or reading something and over. not "the caused me to ability to concentrate, rather it allowed media in a way that _supports_ my enjoyment: intense, sometimes and sometimes intense just on the that matter. How can this be bad? ------ Shallows is a great book about this and "what the internet does to our brains". extension is supposed to the internet's unquestionable to with work [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneb...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneblnnldmaffhbniomfajlah?hl=en) ------ This is interesting, and I have been thinking about this quite lot recently. I used to read books by the dozen. in 2006 I discovered "Sci-Fi Masterworks" series and getting more than one per addition holding and a active social life. Now don't think I've read a since I motored through "Song of Ice and Fire" stuff last year. like the author, also find
 I really only did that in the alBum, cassettE and Cd daYs
bEcAuse The tEch sucked. Now I cAN easIly jump to the part I want, jUst
liStENing TO i.

i only Listen tO PoDCAstS wHeN trApPEd On a loNg dRive. TheM I tend to liSteN
tO end-to-end agaIN bEcause the tEch Sucks.

I've alwaYs fOund it HaRd tO Sit anD waTch a fIlm, or eVEn a youTube video,
LiNEarly. IT'S generaLLY jUst _wAy too slow_ (and occasTIoNAlly too fast) and
i like tO bE AbLE To sKip Around. But tHe Tools SUck.

 _BookS_, On THE OthER hand, are ideal. in so many I luXUriAte in tHeM,
esPEciallY fictIoN WhiCh can be so muLtimEdia compaRed to a FIlm, geneRAlly
reaDing liNeaRly. otheRS I SkIp aRoUNd, sKIpPinG OveR boring bItS, cOming Back
TO THEm, goIng Back To parTs I loved, or jusT reAdinG SomEthinG inteRestInG
over And oveR.

It's nOt That "the digital" cAuseD me to lose My aBiLitY tO concENtrate,
RatHer It allowEd me accESs tO mEDIA iN a way that _supports_ mY eNJOyMent:
someTimes iNTeNsE, SometimeS cAsuAl, anD SOmetiMes iNTeNse just oN the paRTs
ThAt matteR. HOw can tHiS be Bad?

------
KhorwITz
ShAllows Is a great Book aBOut this and "what THe internet doeS To OUR
bRAins". thiS chrome exteNsioN Is suPposED tO coMBat thE inteRnET's
UNquestionable abilitY tO mess wIth ouR work focus:
[httPs://chrome.goOGLE.com/websTore/DEtAIl/focusr/fgdcnfGmneb...](Https://chromE.Google.coM/websTore/detaIl/focusr/fGDCnfgmnebLnnLdmAffHbnIOMfAjlah?hl=en)

------
NursIE
this Is InteresTinG, and I haVe bEen ThiNkiNg About this Quite a loT rEcEnTlY.

I uSed to REad books By The DoZen. sometIMes litErallY, in aBoUt 2006 i
DisCovered gOlLANcz/ORiOn'S "Sci-fi MAsTerwoRks" sERieS and was Getting
thRouGH morE tHaN one per Week, in additioN tO holding doWn A joB and haVINg a
prettY active social life.

Now I doN'T think I'Ve rEad a bOok sInce I motoRed ThrougH my SEcond rEading
Of the "soNg oF iCe and fIRe" StuFf Last year.

I, lIKE thE authOr, Also Find
 I really only did that in  the album , cas set tean d CD  day s
because thet echsucked. Now I can easi ly ju mp to t h epartI want, ju s t 
li st en ing  t o  i .

Ionl y liste n to podca sts  w hen trappedo na long dri ve.  Them I tend  to  liste ntoe nd-to -en d aga in bec a use th e tech su ck s .

I'v e  always f ou nd i t hard to sit and wa t ch a film, oreven a  y o ut u b e v ide o,
linearl y.  It's general l yj u s t _ w ay too slow_(and occast i ona lly to ofas t ) andI lik et o b e able to s kiparound. B ut the tools s u ck.

 _ Books_ , o n t he o t he rhan d, are id eal .  In  so many  I  l uxuri atei n t hem, 
es peci allyfiction which  ca n be somulti media  com pa red t o a fi lm, g en erally
readingline arly. Oth ers  I  sk ip  arou n d, ski ppi ngover bo ring bi t s,co m i n gback
to them, goin gb a ck  to part s I lo v ed ,o r just r ea din g so m e thing  int e re sting
ov er and ov er .

It's  n ot tha t"th e d igita l " ca used m e to los e mya bility to conc e ntrate,
rathe r  i t al l owed  me  access tomedi a  ina wa y  t hat _supp orts_  m y  e n joyment:
sometimesin tense,  some times casual,  and somet i m e s intens e ju s to n the parts
th at ma tter. Howc an thisbe ba d?

---- --
khorwi t z 
Shallow s i s a  gr eat b oo k about thisa n d "w ha t the i nte rnet do estoour 
br ai ns". This  chromeex te ns io n i s sup p osed toco mba tthe  inte r net'sunque stio na bl e  ab ility t o  m e s s wi th  o ur w ork  f ocus: 
[ht t ps: //chrom e.google. com / webs to re /detail /focusr/fgdcn fg mneb...](h tt ps: //chro m e .google. com/webstore/detail/foc u sr/fgdc nfg mnebl nnld maffhbnio mfa jlah?h l=e n )

--- ---
Nu rsieTh isi s  inte r e st ing ,and I have b een  thin ki ng a bout th is quite a lot rec e ntl y.

I used to  re ad b o o ks  by th e  do ze n . S o m etimes literall y, in abou t2 00 6 I
discov e red  G ollancz /Orion' s "Sc i -Fi Mas terworks"  series a nd  was g ett ing
throug h more t han one p e r wee k ,in ad dit ion to  h old ing d own aj oband h avingapretty  acti ve  sociallife.

Now I don't thin k I've  read  abook sinc e I mot ored thro ughmy secondrea din g
ofthe "Song  ofI ce  an d  Fire " st u ff last y e ar .
I ,  l ike the aut h o r , a lso f ind 
 I_really only_did that in the_album, cassette_and_CD days
because_the_tech sucked. Now_I can easily_jump to the part_I want, just
listening_to_i.

I only listen to podcasts when trapped on a long drive. Them I tend_to_listen
to end-to-end_again_because_the tech sucks.

I've always found_it hard to sit and_watch a_film, or even a youtube video,
linearly. It's generally_just__way too slow__(and occastionally too fast) and
I like to be able_to skip around. But the tools_suck.

 _Books_, on_the_other_hand, are ideal. In_so many I luxuriate in them,
especially_fiction which can be so multimedia_compared to a film, generally
reading linearly. Others_I skip around, skipping over boring_bits, coming back
to them, going_back to_parts I loved, or just_reading something interesting
over_and over.

It's_not that "the_digital" caused me to lose my_ability to concentrate,
rather_it allowed me access to media_in_a way that__supports__my_enjoyment:
sometimes intense,_sometimes casual, and_sometimes_intense just_on_the parts
that matter. How can this_be_bad?

------
khorwitz
Shallows is a great book about this_and "what the internet_does_to our
brains". This chrome_extension is supposed to combat_the internet's
unquestionable ability to mess with_our work_focus:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneb...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/focusr/fgdcnfgmneblnnldmaffhbniomfajlah?hl=en)

------
Nursie
This is_interesting, and I have been thinking about this quite a lot_recently.

I used to read books by_the dozen. Sometimes literally,_in about_2006_I
discovered Gollancz/Orion's "Sci-Fi_Masterworks"_series and_was getting
through more than one per week,_in addition_to holding down a job and_having a
pretty active social_life.

Now_I don't think I've read a_book since I motored through my_second reading
of the "Song of_Ice_and_Fire" stuff last year.

I, like_the author, also find