I've had a bit of an interest in speed-reading for a while now. I love the idea of being able to read masses of literature in no time flat; but I've never tried to get into it, because every time I start to research the topic, I come across info on the trade-off with reading comprehension and get turned off. As far as I'm concerned, comprehension is so much more important than speed, that even a small decline would be unacceptable.
As an experiment, I've decided to have a crack at speed-listening instead. A lot of software these days will do on-the-fly pitch-shifting when you adjust playback speed; meaning you don't get that chipmunk effect that you used to get when you fast-forwarded cassette tapes. So anyway, each week I've been gradually turning up the speed of my podcast player. I'm currently past the 2x point, and even if progress slows down, I should reach 4x (my player's top speed) by the end of the year. And here's the interesting thing: For the most part, the audio sounds almost completely normal. I mean, I'm kind of aware that it's sped up, but unless I'm listening to a fast-talker with a thick foreign accent, I don't feel like I'm having any comprehension trouble whatsoever. And any time I do turn the high-speed off to accommodate such a speaker, I find that they sound comically slow. I also have a sense that I'm understanding people better in real life—like I don't have to ask them to repeat themselves as much as I used to.
Anyway, a side-effect of all this is that I've had to start downloading more podcasts (any suggestions that anyone has would be greatly appreciated—but please, nothing musical—music sounds rubbish sped up). One of the places I've turned is the BBC. And as a result, I've heard A LOT about Jeremy Corbyn in the last week or so. Specifically, I've heard a lot of discussion about whether or not he can be removed from the position of Labour leader before he destroys the party. Which I find remarkable, considering he's only just been elected to the position—and with the largest number of votes ever in the history of any political party in Britain.
The only conclusion I can come to is that "common wisdom" has drifted so far towards neoliberal ideology that anyone who espouses economic ideals from the pre-Thatcher era is now dismissed out of hand as a raving lunatic. Seriously, amongst the dozens of hours of drivel I've listened to, I don't think I've once heard the pros & cons of his views properly examined or discussed. Rather, it's taken for granted that everything he says is idiotic bullshit that no sensible person could ever get behind (*remember, he was elected leader of a political party with more votes than anyone in Britain—EVER!*) and the conversation swirls around Labour ceasing to be a major party and whether one of the minor parties will rise to take it's place, or if the UK will transition to a system with one major party and a rabble of smaller ones.
I know you're not keen on politics Squib, but I'm curious to know if you've picked up any sense of how people up North (where, I believe, the socialist SNP hold 56 out of 59 seats) feel about old Jeremy?
*I'd also like to point out that after KRudd's election, when we had a Labor federal government and Labor state governments across the board, a number of experts here were similarly speculating whether or not it was the end of the Liberal party. Well, we all saw how that one turned out, didn't we?*
And now for something completely different … ACROBATIC GYMNASTICS! From the 1st ever European Games (held in June this year—yes I'm late in getting to it, I don't care).
BELGIUM: MIXED PAIRSDynamic Routine
Balance Routine
BELARUS: WOMEN'S GROUP
Balance Routine
Dynamic Routine
Also, the weather here is quite nice. How is it where you are?
9 comments :
Speed listening. This reminds me of a sci-fi where humans have been tweaked and so can do things at high speed. In terms of comprehension, I don't know. It's amazing how quickly I forget what I've read, however slowly I've read it. After the years pass, I sometimes can't be sure if I've read it at all, let alone what it was about. Haven't listened to podcasts in ages but always enjoyed The Infinite Monkey Cage
Jeremy Corbyn. I don't care what he's about, I'm sick to death of seeing his name!! I don't pick up any sense of anything, having only one friend here and her being tall and Australian anyway. I would guess the SNP don't want Corbyn stealing back their voters on the one hand. On the other hand, they don't want the Tories in power although the SNP are the reason the Tories are in power, something about cutting your nose off to spite your face. But I'm guessing the SNP would be happy to be all palsy-walsy with Corbyn, come the next election. I dunno, Corbyn might not last that long; he's a bit radical
Cheers for the feedback Squib; both on the political front, and with the podcast suggestion.
I also forget things that I've watched & read over time; but to me, that seems different to reading something and coming away only understanding half of it.
It's the same result in the end end, isn't it
Should add that if Corbyn REALLY is an anti-semite who believes in the 9/11 conspiracy, New World Order, AND homeopathy, I won't be voting Labour. I will be in a quandary then
Did you see the article about the Free-Speech Art Sylvanian thing?
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/sep/26/sylvanian-families-isis-freedom-of-expression-exhibition
You're right; it is the same result in the end-end. But if you take that line of thinking, the logical conclusion is "You're going to die eventually anyway, so why bother learning anything? Might as well just kill yourself now." Even I'm not that pessimistic. I think it's worth understanding things, even if you're not guaranteed to retain that knowledge.
Wow, even with everything I've heard about Corbyn over the last 2 weeks, most of that's new to me. I can see why he'd be labelled anit-Semitic, since he wants Israel to get out of Palestine (he also wants England to get out of Northern Ireland). The other stuff, I'm in the dark about. Is the New World Order a reference to the European Union (because I can see how you could draw that comparison)? By 9/11 conspiracy, does he just mean the conspiracy to use it as a pretext to invade Iraq (which they knew wasn't involved)? The homeopathy is the big worry … unless he's talking about the fact that it's as effective as placebo (which does have a measurable—and sometimes quite significant—effect)?
I had not seen that article Squib. Thank you for the link. I have to say that something about it smells awfully fishy to me.
Other installations in the exhibition include Iranian Maryam Deyhim’s lifesized figure woman in a hijab decorated with chains, and the naked torso of a woman about to be stoned for adultery.
It wasn't even the most provocative piece in the exhibit.
They pointed out that Isis Threaten Sylvania had already been exhibited, and “enthusiastically received”, as part the Art15 art fair at London’s Royal College of Art in May.
The piece had already been displayed at least once before, apparently without consequence.
Mimsy, a London-based artist, was particularly outraged by the suggestion, allegedly made during discussions with the police, that Isis Threaten Sylvania “isn’t real art”.
If it was a security issue, why were police putting forward an opinion on artistic merit?
The decision to remove the work from Passion for Freedom came after the Mall Gallery consulted the police, who raised “a number of serious concerns regarding the potentially inflammatory content of Mimsy’s work”.
A spokeswoman for the gallery said: “Mall Galleries was approached by Westminster Police who expressed concern about the potential risks of including Mimsy’s work. They made it clear there would be an additional policing cost if the work was included in the exhibition and indicated this cost would be passed on either to the artist or to the exhibition organiser. Mall Galleries relayed this information to the exhibition organiser, whose Board met and decided to remove the work from the exhibition.”
It was removed from the Passion for Freedom exhibition at the Mall galleries after police raised concerns about the “potentially inflammatory content” of the work, informing the organisers that, if they went ahead with their plans to display it, they would have to pay £36,000 for security for the six-day show.
My suspicion is that the real title for this article should be "UK police attempt to weasel £36,000 out of art gallery". And to be honest, this is the aspect of the story I'd like to know more about. Were the police threatening to stop the exhibition going ahead if the gallery didn't pay, or were they just saying they wouldn't provide security? How much do the police make each year from doing what basically amounts to private security contracting?
"You're right; it is the same result in the end-end. But if you take that line of thinking, the logical conclusion is "You're going to die eventually anyway, so why bother learning anything? Might as well just kill yourself now.""
Hah. No, I don't think that is a logical conclusion to whether we should speed read. It may be the logical conclusion to the question is life pointless and if so, what should we do about it?
1. Is he anti-semitic? This article makes me wonder...
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/13/jeremy-corbyn-labour-leadership-foreign-policy-antisemitism
2.If, by New World Order, he means the EU or Council of the EU, then he should probably make that distinction, rather than sounding all tin foil hat-ish
3. I don't know re: 9/11
4."If it was a security issue, why were police putting forward an opinion on artistic merit?"
Someone is always bound to say that's not real art. I don't think what the police think is art is relevant here. As to cost, police should always be free at public events. Except football :p
I agree, strange the hijab piece didn't get withdrawn. You could argue the stoning is just criticism of sharia law and not Islam. But the hijab seems contentious
PS. Homeopathy. Again, if he meant as a placebo, then he should have said so!
No, I don't think that is a logical conclusion to whether we should speed read
But isn't the question "If you can't retain information permanently, is it worth having it at all"? And isn't that the logical answer?
***
You could argue the stoning is just criticism of sharia law and not Islam
Just as the Sylvania piece was about ISIS, and not Islam.
As to cost, police should always be free at public events
I still think this is the guts of the matter. Note that in the article, police said there would be an ADDITIONAL cost to the gallery if they displayed the piece; which suggests they were already paying the police. Again I ask, how much and what for exactly? The more I think about it, the more this seems like a negotiating tactic (/scam). If they were really worried about the "inflammatory nature" of the piece they would have just said "no", not "give us an extra 36 grand".
***
I read that article on Corbyn being an antisemite, and my response got so long that I would have had to spreak it over half a dozen comments. I just made it its own post instead.
Post a Comment