▲ 683 ▼ I can read (thelemmy.club) submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by ccf@lemmy.world to c/curatedtumblr@sh.itjust.works 48 comments fedilink hide all child comments https://www.tumblr.com/thelawfulchaotic/807267774110089216/
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 34 points 7 months ago (14 children) reading speed of 1500 wpm this is bait permalink fedilink source hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 31 points 7 months ago That was the point where I thought "this guy is a wanker... but he's right" permalink fedilink source parent [–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago (10 children) Not if he's measuring his scanning speed and not his literal reading speed. Which is the sort of thing that the folk who teach scanning to professionals who need to "read" hundreds of pages each day call their techniques. They used to be all over the place until enough people called them out on the mislabel. (Not to mention three-cuing...) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 14 points 7 months ago (9 children) He specifically says, "with full comprehension", so, like I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (8 children) Full comprehension just means you gathered the intent of the point the writer was trying to get across. You can easily do that with 20% of the words they wrote if you pick the right words. Scanning is basically training to find all the important words to fully piece together the idea as quickly as possible. So 25 words per second may sound like alot, but it's really the time necessary to find 5 words per second out of the crowd of 25. And like any other skill, it is something you get significantly better at with practice. Lawyers are gonna have alot of practice if they work on a skill like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago It's either that, or Legalese has an enormously low entropy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Full comprehension implies - to me at least - that you are not just picking up the "intent of the point" but also subtler cues. No, you don't need to read every single word in order to do that but 1500 words a minute with full comprehension is still horseshit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago There are some people who can do page-at-a-time comprehension. But I suspect that with lawyers, it is instead that it isn't words they are comprehending, rather, it is phrases which changes the whole equation. I guarantee you that in legalese, there are a gazillion boilerplate/stock phrases, & once one recognizes the phrase, one can skip past it to see what that-"atom" pertains to. Same as how, in music, one can see a particular phrase or series-of-phrases, & just flow through the playing of that, from one's programming, not bothering to concern oneself with the sheet-music until that phrase/series-of-phrases is ended. I've encountered enough diversity-in-mental-capability that I'm not balking at that claim of theirs: it's possible from what I've encountered among others. _ /\ _ permalink fedilink source parent [–] eleijeep@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago Lawyering is well known to be a profession where words really aren't important so you can miss out every other one and still just get the gist. No court case has ever been decided by pedantry over wording or meaning in legal texts after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) Also specified "dense scientific text". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) Still has just as many predictable connective words you dont have to pay much attention to. And as long as you are familiar with all the terms you are encountering, it only makes a pretty small difference whether they are plain english or heavily latin derived. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent [–] khannie@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago 25 words per second. Like would you ever jog on with that. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lime@feddit.nu 6 points 7 months ago yeah that's three sentences a second permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 31 points 7 months ago That was the point where I thought "this guy is a wanker... but he's right" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 16 points 7 months ago (10 children) Not if he's measuring his scanning speed and not his literal reading speed. Which is the sort of thing that the folk who teach scanning to professionals who need to "read" hundreds of pages each day call their techniques. They used to be all over the place until enough people called them out on the mislabel. (Not to mention three-cuing...) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 10 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@piefed.social 14 points 7 months ago (9 children) He specifically says, "with full comprehension", so, like I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (8 children) Full comprehension just means you gathered the intent of the point the writer was trying to get across. You can easily do that with 20% of the words they wrote if you pick the right words. Scanning is basically training to find all the important words to fully piece together the idea as quickly as possible. So 25 words per second may sound like alot, but it's really the time necessary to find 5 words per second out of the crowd of 25. And like any other skill, it is something you get significantly better at with practice. Lawyers are gonna have alot of practice if they work on a skill like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago It's either that, or Legalese has an enormously low entropy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Full comprehension implies - to me at least - that you are not just picking up the "intent of the point" but also subtler cues. No, you don't need to read every single word in order to do that but 1500 words a minute with full comprehension is still horseshit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago There are some people who can do page-at-a-time comprehension. But I suspect that with lawyers, it is instead that it isn't words they are comprehending, rather, it is phrases which changes the whole equation. I guarantee you that in legalese, there are a gazillion boilerplate/stock phrases, & once one recognizes the phrase, one can skip past it to see what that-"atom" pertains to. Same as how, in music, one can see a particular phrase or series-of-phrases, & just flow through the playing of that, from one's programming, not bothering to concern oneself with the sheet-music until that phrase/series-of-phrases is ended. I've encountered enough diversity-in-mental-capability that I'm not balking at that claim of theirs: it's possible from what I've encountered among others. _ /\ _ permalink fedilink source parent [–] eleijeep@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago Lawyering is well known to be a profession where words really aren't important so you can miss out every other one and still just get the gist. No court case has ever been decided by pedantry over wording or meaning in legal texts after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) Also specified "dense scientific text". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) Still has just as many predictable connective words you dont have to pay much attention to. And as long as you are familiar with all the terms you are encountering, it only makes a pretty small difference whether they are plain english or heavily latin derived. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 14 points 7 months ago (9 children) He specifically says, "with full comprehension", so, like I said. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (8 children) Full comprehension just means you gathered the intent of the point the writer was trying to get across. You can easily do that with 20% of the words they wrote if you pick the right words. Scanning is basically training to find all the important words to fully piece together the idea as quickly as possible. So 25 words per second may sound like alot, but it's really the time necessary to find 5 words per second out of the crowd of 25. And like any other skill, it is something you get significantly better at with practice. Lawyers are gonna have alot of practice if they work on a skill like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago It's either that, or Legalese has an enormously low entropy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Full comprehension implies - to me at least - that you are not just picking up the "intent of the point" but also subtler cues. No, you don't need to read every single word in order to do that but 1500 words a minute with full comprehension is still horseshit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago There are some people who can do page-at-a-time comprehension. But I suspect that with lawyers, it is instead that it isn't words they are comprehending, rather, it is phrases which changes the whole equation. I guarantee you that in legalese, there are a gazillion boilerplate/stock phrases, & once one recognizes the phrase, one can skip past it to see what that-"atom" pertains to. Same as how, in music, one can see a particular phrase or series-of-phrases, & just flow through the playing of that, from one's programming, not bothering to concern oneself with the sheet-music until that phrase/series-of-phrases is ended. I've encountered enough diversity-in-mental-capability that I'm not balking at that claim of theirs: it's possible from what I've encountered among others. _ /\ _ permalink fedilink source parent [–] eleijeep@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago Lawyering is well known to be a profession where words really aren't important so you can miss out every other one and still just get the gist. No court case has ever been decided by pedantry over wording or meaning in legal texts after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) Also specified "dense scientific text". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) Still has just as many predictable connective words you dont have to pay much attention to. And as long as you are familiar with all the terms you are encountering, it only makes a pretty small difference whether they are plain english or heavily latin derived. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (8 children) Full comprehension just means you gathered the intent of the point the writer was trying to get across. You can easily do that with 20% of the words they wrote if you pick the right words. Scanning is basically training to find all the important words to fully piece together the idea as quickly as possible. So 25 words per second may sound like alot, but it's really the time necessary to find 5 words per second out of the crowd of 25. And like any other skill, it is something you get significantly better at with practice. Lawyers are gonna have alot of practice if they work on a skill like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago It's either that, or Legalese has an enormously low entropy. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Full comprehension implies - to me at least - that you are not just picking up the "intent of the point" but also subtler cues. No, you don't need to read every single word in order to do that but 1500 words a minute with full comprehension is still horseshit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago There are some people who can do page-at-a-time comprehension. But I suspect that with lawyers, it is instead that it isn't words they are comprehending, rather, it is phrases which changes the whole equation. I guarantee you that in legalese, there are a gazillion boilerplate/stock phrases, & once one recognizes the phrase, one can skip past it to see what that-"atom" pertains to. Same as how, in music, one can see a particular phrase or series-of-phrases, & just flow through the playing of that, from one's programming, not bothering to concern oneself with the sheet-music until that phrase/series-of-phrases is ended. I've encountered enough diversity-in-mental-capability that I'm not balking at that claim of theirs: it's possible from what I've encountered among others. _ /\ _ permalink fedilink source parent [–] eleijeep@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago Lawyering is well known to be a profession where words really aren't important so you can miss out every other one and still just get the gist. No court case has ever been decided by pedantry over wording or meaning in legal texts after all. permalink fedilink source parent [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) Also specified "dense scientific text". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) Still has just as many predictable connective words you dont have to pay much attention to. And as long as you are familiar with all the terms you are encountering, it only makes a pretty small difference whether they are plain english or heavily latin derived. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago It's either that, or Legalese has an enormously low entropy. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago (1 child) Full comprehension implies - to me at least - that you are not just picking up the "intent of the point" but also subtler cues. No, you don't need to read every single word in order to do that but 1500 words a minute with full comprehension is still horseshit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago There are some people who can do page-at-a-time comprehension. But I suspect that with lawyers, it is instead that it isn't words they are comprehending, rather, it is phrases which changes the whole equation. I guarantee you that in legalese, there are a gazillion boilerplate/stock phrases, & once one recognizes the phrase, one can skip past it to see what that-"atom" pertains to. Same as how, in music, one can see a particular phrase or series-of-phrases, & just flow through the playing of that, from one's programming, not bothering to concern oneself with the sheet-music until that phrase/series-of-phrases is ended. I've encountered enough diversity-in-mental-capability that I'm not balking at that claim of theirs: it's possible from what I've encountered among others. _ /\ _ permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago There are some people who can do page-at-a-time comprehension. But I suspect that with lawyers, it is instead that it isn't words they are comprehending, rather, it is phrases which changes the whole equation. I guarantee you that in legalese, there are a gazillion boilerplate/stock phrases, & once one recognizes the phrase, one can skip past it to see what that-"atom" pertains to. Same as how, in music, one can see a particular phrase or series-of-phrases, & just flow through the playing of that, from one's programming, not bothering to concern oneself with the sheet-music until that phrase/series-of-phrases is ended. I've encountered enough diversity-in-mental-capability that I'm not balking at that claim of theirs: it's possible from what I've encountered among others. _ /\ _ permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eleijeep@piefed.social 2 points 7 months ago Lawyering is well known to be a profession where words really aren't important so you can miss out every other one and still just get the gist. No court case has ever been decided by pedantry over wording or meaning in legal texts after all. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (3 children) Also specified "dense scientific text". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) Still has just as many predictable connective words you dont have to pay much attention to. And as long as you are familiar with all the terms you are encountering, it only makes a pretty small difference whether they are plain english or heavily latin derived. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (2 children) Still has just as many predictable connective words you dont have to pay much attention to. And as long as you are familiar with all the terms you are encountering, it only makes a pretty small difference whether they are plain english or heavily latin derived. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child) That's not what "dense" means to me. Maybe it's just my mathematician bias, but I don't consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be "dense". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) Ah, I suppose if it's artificially created for whatever specific speed-test environment or something. But I just assume they would use the real structure of language for those. So I took his use of dense as being a somewhat redundant descriptor with scientific language(though likely leaning more towards heavily polysyllabic words). I figure, if one interpretation of the words he used leads to what he said making sense, and another leads to it not making sense, why assume he meant the latter? Not to mention we're almost all Autistic here, so having random individual 'off the charts' abilities is gonna be pretty much the norm. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] khannie@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago 25 words per second. Like would you ever jog on with that. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lime@feddit.nu 6 points 7 months ago yeah that's three sentences a second permalink fedilink source parent
