7/12/2026 at 8:58:57 PM
Is there value in identifying the difference between reading a longer article like this one and an actual book? Reading the news from the AP/Reuters and a book on history?I spend lots of time online, primarily on my phone, reading. I don’t watch videos and I don’t use social media aside from browsing the Reddit front page. I try to justify my online escapes because I’m reading a substack, a bit of news, an interesting HN link about someone’s project.
I know I’m fooling myself. Closing the door on the internet and opening a page on an ereader or a physical book is absolutely a different activity. While the content of the book is important (and hopefully well written and captivating!) I regard it now with the added benefit of exercising my attention span.
An interesting book I read called Peak Mind makes the simple point that your life consists of what you pay attention to. Since then I’ve been trying (and failing, and trying) to be more conscious of where I spend my attention and how I can strengthen it against the well researched and incredibly effective distraction engines in my daily life.
by pseudonymidy
7/12/2026 at 9:13:07 PM
> Is there value in identifying the difference between reading a longer article like this one and an actual book?Almost every study that looks at this finds that there is. Between the time for deeper contemplation, cognitive load of sustained attention and greater potential information content of a larger body of text compared with a smaller one, someone who reads books is generally going to more competently understand things gestures generally than someone who gets everything from articles online.
by JumpCrisscross
7/12/2026 at 11:13:05 PM
I think the major difference is that this article describes some meta concept. Despite being abstract its very concrete. If 2 people read something that is fantasy or even describing a physical process like wood carving. Despite reading the same thing both parties have an entirely different picture of what happened. The clothes on the people are different, the building they occupy is different, the wood you are carving is different, the tools you use are different. These difference are actually the most increasing details which your brain fills in, and this is something completely different from when you watch TV. All the details are filled its concrete and non-abstract. It can still be a compeling story or piece of art but often people are are much worst artist and visual things rarely capture all the things your brain can fill in for detail that make something cohesive. And the details they fill in are often details your brain finds mundane and ignores entirely.I've been learning about wood turning and carving recent and the amount of character it instils in what use to be dead piece of furniture in a room is honestly life changing. Reading can do this but there are other physical activities which I think a digital society loses touch with. Most of the Ikea furniture today is well engineering but artistically dead (definitely cheaper though :D ).
by xphos
7/13/2026 at 7:52:27 AM
I think that can be true and probably is, but it seems like an over simplification. If you spend 14 hours a day reading Wikipedia and studying it, say working math equations, cross referencing sources, etc… is that really going to make you understand less than someone who reads enormously long but low quality romance novels for the same number of hours?by warshinder
7/13/2026 at 11:18:25 AM
It would only be an oversimplification if they had claimed that every book reader understands more than every online reader, regardless of subject matter. They didn't. Plus, in your example, this hypothetical online reader has already acquired the capacities that books are supposed to help develop, and he might be closer to a book writer.by frgturpwd
7/13/2026 at 3:31:00 PM
A more concrete example: SBF infamously said he doesn’t read books. While he was obviously not very bright in many ways, I’m certain there are heavy book readers who are far less bright or informed. I know, because I’ve met them. My only point is that there exists a bias towards books that is sometimes but often not warranted.by warshinder
7/12/2026 at 11:28:17 PM
How could less correlated reading, no matter how high the quality, possibly compare to a solid book - in use of time or depth of impact?The second chapter of every book has the advantage of being written, taking for granted that the previous chapter was read. The density and complexity writers and readers can handle in each chapter, keeps increasing throughout a book.
Short reads can convey important things, but nowhere near as many per page.
If you took any wonderful dense book about anything important, and turned it into short reads, with lower correlations of who finds them, reads them, and when, the page count would have to increase 10x - 100x. The setups and redundancy would be immense.
Books also get to explore many perspectives on the same important ideas. Which is not redundancy. It is the difference between recognizing a good idea and understanding it.
Feeling an epiphany vs. absorbing its implications. Awareness vs. fluency.
by Nevermark
7/12/2026 at 9:42:31 PM
I’m not familiar with the research but I will say that conclusion “feels” right to me.Have they found a modern day metric that we should all be hunting in our quest for reading health? A literary equivalent to the daily 10,000 steps?
Maybe 10,000 words!
by pseudonymidy
7/12/2026 at 10:33:02 PM
There is also a weird, robust mortality relationship where book readers live longer than periodical readers "regardless of gender, health, wealth, or education" [1]. In those studies, the threshold was 30 minutes of book reading a day.by JumpCrisscross
7/12/2026 at 11:16:37 PM
While this is just a rule of thumb, I consider moderate exercise, reading, and socializing to be roughly equivalent in positive health benefits. I try to get a little bit of each every day, and then try to have longer sessions of each once or twice a week.by hx8
7/12/2026 at 10:48:25 PM
Ten thousand books in an 80-year lifetime would mean finishing one book every three days. That's aggressive, but entirely achievable.by sowbug
7/13/2026 at 8:17:14 AM
Meh, if the book is bad you fall asleep in 15-30 min. If the book is good you put it down when you finish it and notice it’s morning already. Easy enough.Talking about fiction read for entertainment of course. HN does tend to assume books are only for learning something.
by nottorp
7/13/2026 at 2:22:24 AM
Even a longer online article or news story is very short compared to a book.Reading a book is a bit more like getting into a "flow" state writing code (although, with LLMs now doing most of the writing, that may not happen any more either). You become immersed in the prose, getting all the characters and the roles they play in the story into your mental context. You tune out the rest of the world to some degree, lose track of passing time, and if you are interrupted it feels like a jolt and it takes a while to get back into that state.
by SoftTalker
7/13/2026 at 12:21:16 AM
I didn't read Peak Mind, but two books that are somewhat in the same vain (based on your description) are:1. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/59794522-non-things
2. https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/236849376-attensity
First one I highly recommend. Second one I'm reading now, so far it's.. okay. The ideas in the book resonate with me but the writing is poor. The first book (Non-Things) talks about our relation to the digital versus the physical, and it convinced me to stop using my phone as much.
by Insanity
7/13/2026 at 12:33:00 PM
> Is there value in identifying the difference between reading a longer article like this one and an actual book?The difference is gigantic. All the best writers and most important writers are dead and aren't posting comments on Twitter or writing articles for blogs or newspapers.
You could ask yourself similarly if there's any value in listening to any other music than what they are playing on the Top 40 radio channel.
by carlosjobim
7/13/2026 at 12:27:25 AM
Books are generally far higher quality texts too. The really good articles get republished as books, think about that.by tehjoker
7/12/2026 at 11:53:38 PM
> "Is there value in identifying the difference between reading a longer article like this one and an actual book?"I know its such a common thing to suggest, but if you haven't, I really would suggest reading Understanding Media by Marshall McLuhan.
tl;dr is that every single medium of communication shapes the message it is trying to deliver. This is unavoidable and once you understand that you begin to see it everywhere (LLMS? yes).
by relativeadv
7/13/2026 at 3:30:37 PM
And at a meta level, every medium of communication shapes its receiver as well (think about the dumbing down effect of TV vs a book).by infinite8s
7/13/2026 at 9:31:22 AM
This is purely my experience but the difference between reading a good book vs consuming any other kind of media has been night vs day. I don't think any long article has thoroughly altered my perception about something important in my life. Certainly no Instagram reel has. Short form has been mostly useless, long form has sometimes been useful. But multiple books have had a life-changing impact on me over the course of my life.I read a lot of books in my 20s. Many were forgettable, but a couple totally realigned my view of reality and what was possible and I went off to create a highly unconventional life because of them.
I then stopped reading books in my 30s - that time mostly got spent reading web articles and social media instead. This was a stagnant period of my life in many ways.
In my 40s I started to wonder if there might be a connection and I started making a conscious effort to start reading books again. Surprise surprise, a few years later I'm experiencing one of the most creative and productive periods of my life.
A great book will take a big idea and expound on it from multiple angles. It'll build both a logical and an emotional case for looking at the world differently. For me at least this type of shift in thinking takes reading multiple chapters worth of good arguments get it fully embedded in my brain.
Remember, the author of a great book may spend _years_ researching it before he even gets started on the writing part. The best books are next level stuff and I feel no other medium compares.
There will of course be many books that don't have this impact and end up being throwaways. I will buy them and if they aren't hooking me I simply don't finish them.
I think this all applies equally to fiction and non-fiction.
I think there might be some people out there who've experienced this degree of personal change from interacting with certain online communities. That's the only analogue I can think of. For me though it's books.
by safety1st
7/12/2026 at 9:01:13 PM
This is a great question. I would love to know the answer to this as well. +1by bob_theslob646
7/12/2026 at 9:36:58 PM
There is a difference between reading a short article and reading an actual book. Reading short articles gives you quick facts and situational awareness, but it doesn't build wisdom.My personal theory is that wisdom comes from deep, long-form reasoning. You can't get it just by skimming short articles or memorizing isolated facts. When we read a deep and comprehensive book, the real value is the mental labor. It forces us to follow a long, complex argument, spot subtle patterns, and actively debate the author in our heads. We have to weave different facts together to see the bigger picture.
This kind of "hard reading" actually changes our brain by building new neural connections. Wisdom goes beyond collecting information. It's more about the cognitive journey of thinking deeply and widely about a topic. Short articles give us data points, but books train us how to think.
Of course, serious researches may tell us otherwise. I don't have any data points outside my personal experience.
by hintymad