Passing the time

[Scurra]

Oops, it probably would have helped if I'd put the link in, wouldn't it?
http://www.spritzinc.com/about/#

OK, wow. That's a really clever idea implemented well. Clearly it has different problems to "normal" reading, but I was surprised at how easy it was to follow even at 600wpm.

[Bunnylump]

Yes, that's what surprised me. I am naturally a VERY VERY slow reader, but when it was set up like that, I could also read at 600wpm. My son's comment was that it made him CONCENTRATE better - he gets really easily distracted when he's reading normally.

[giraffe]

?? I still don't understand. It didn't seem to do much.

[Bunnylump]

If you click on the link on the top right, it should open up a little box which lets you read one word at a time, and you should see a drop down list to be able to choose the speed. Try reading it.

[giraffe]

I found that really difficult to read. You can't speed up and slow down as you need to, and look back at the previous word if you think you misread it. I was also distracted by the coloured letters and thought they were trying to spell something out, but if they were I couldn't tell what it was. I also felt that my vision was narrowing into the bit I was looking at and things round the edge were going grey. It's not natural to not move your eyes as you read.

[Scurra]

What's "natural" about reading?
I also started out wondering if the coloured letters were saying something, but once I realised that they were just illustrating how words are sometimes shifted from the "middle" to be easier to access, it didn't bother me. (The blog article explains that.)
I can see how it might be annoying if you think you missed something, but I am honestly surprised that you would be worried about that? Surely the context of the surrounding words makes it clear pretty quickly what it is saying? Unless, of course, the sentence has been deliberately constructed to mislead (which is not unusual!)
But yes, there are clearly different problems to "natural" reading. I agree that the speeding up and slowing down is one - I really regret the tendency of modern websites to have lots of "video blogs" instead of articles, especially newspaper sites, because reading can be done at your own speed whereas video has to be watched (and listened to) at the speed of the video. And staring at the box leads to annoying after-effects too. On the other hand, I think that the way it focuses your vision onto the specific area of the text may actually be good as it is less easy to get distracted.

It's clearly not meant to be a total replacement for reading, any more than video was. But as a method for getting through a lot of information in a surprisingly short space of time and - more impressively - in a tiny space of only 13 or so characters, then it's really clever.

[Bunnylump]

I think it's made me realise just what it is, specifically, which makes me read so slowly. I find that when I'm moving my eyes across the page quickly I easily lose where I am, and often accidentally skip a line and so have to re-read it as a result. Whereas just focussing on one spot was really, really easy for me. I suppose ultimately you could have that in the middle of the screen and then have an option of being able to have the full text underneath so that if you lost the thread and wanted to re-read, then you could.

I would be REALLY interested to see what some of my dyslexic students would make of it. I suspect it might be really good for them (if only they could get rid of the white background and make it pale yellow or pale blue instead.)

[giraffe]

I quite often misread something and think it seemed odd, so reread and find it means something completely different. But I think the worst bit was it setting the speed. The lower speeds were tediously slow, but the fastest doesn't really allow for natural speeding up and slowing down.

[clvrlad]

I would be REALLY interested to see what some of my dyslexic students would make of it. I suspect it might be really good for them (if only they could get rid of the white background and make it pale yellow or pale blue instead.)

Well i'm not your student but i found out easy enough I'd miss odd words (even at slower speeds, couldnt stay focussed)but could fill the gaps within the context of the sentence but then i do struggle more with outputting the info rather than reading it
i do read faster than most people

[Scurra]

This will pass the time. A lot of time, in fact...

http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pix ... ystem.html

[Bunnylump]

OMG that is completely ridiculous. Beyond comprehension, really. It makes it all the more impressive that it is possible to see Jupiter at the moment, only using a small telescope.

[LAT]

I don't understand. What is meant to happen?

[giraffe]

Quite interesting, but I got bored just after I passed Jupiter!

[Bunnylump]

I don't understand. What is meant to happen?

Scroll to the right ( I used the right arrow key.) Keep your finger on the button and watch the screen. Eventually you will start to see things as it scrolls.

[MBH]

A lot of time, in fact...

Not too much time - I used old-school 'warp drive' and made it along to Pluto [OK, I took the shortcut from Saturn]

Very interesting view of our place in the local area.

[MBH]

That's a really clever idea implemented well. Clearly it has different problems to "normal" reading, but I was surprised at how easy it was to follow even at 600wpm.

Seconded - that was a very interesting experience. As my usual complaint is that I can't read 'proper' stuff (for learning, etc) I'd love to know if I took information in and remembered it using this technique. 'Passing the time' by reading something technical on my phone / tablet and getting knowledge out of it would be very useful.

For the record, I could manage at 600 but 500 was comfortable for me (in less than 5 minutes work-up).

[Wulfruna]

I also felt that my vision was narrowing into the bit I was looking at and things round the edge were going grey. It's not natural to not move your eyes as you read.

Yes I also had trouble with staring at that central space and found my eyes felt really weird looking at normal print afterwards for a bit. But I agree that it was easy to follow the words and an interesting exercise in speed-reading. But I already whizz along lines pretty fast anyway.... It is also one thing to do a test like that over a few short sentences, but I am not at all sure how I would get on with longer articles - let alone a novel!!!
Just for interest I also tried it out in German (though couldn't quite manage the top speed) - and was highly amused that after a few sentences in perfect German (well the group is also based in Germany as well as the US!) - they then asked us to recommend them and "auf Facebook liken" ..... That is a typical German adoption of an international word - they also "downloaden" information

[giraffe]

There is an experiment thing that I have seen in various places (probably on here amongst others) where all the letters in each word are shuffled, and it is still perfectly easy to read the meaning.

Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

My French friend posted it on her facebook page in French, and I was surprised that I could read it perfectly well, even though I sometimes struggle a bit with what she normally posts. Mind you that might be because of the amount of slang / text speak that is used on facebook.

[Bunnylump]

And yet one of the techniques I use to help some of the very weak readers at school (which really helps some of them) is to look for the "shape" of the word, which would seem to contradict what you have just posted. But I agree, it is perfectly easy to read. The mind is a very strange thing, isn't it?

I've just met up with some friends, one of whom (Janet) had her "adopted grandson" with her, who is two. What a cute little boy, really well behaved. He did make me smile though, he was struggling to say my name, and the closest he could get was "Eagle"

[MBH]

These past two weeks have been '1st Microteach' sessions for the 6 of us in class - 3 each week. I did mine last week with my 'Escape from a Cross-Wrist Grab' session (that I originally did in my PTLLS course). It went fine and didn't warrant any comment here.

This week one gent gave a very interesting interactive demonstration about how the MIND works and the assumptions it makes (and mistakes it makes for that reason). Talking about the brain's blind spots. One is an item I'm sure we've looked at before - each of us having a sentence and having to secretly count occurrences of the letter 'F'. After we all gave our answers and he swapped different individuals bits of paper it became obvious that we all had the same sentence with the offered answers of 2, 3, 6, and 7. [He was interested by the 7 as he'd never had that before.]

The paper was the classic:

FINISHED FILES ARE THE
RESULT OF YEARS OF
SCIENTIFIC STUDY
COMBINED WITH THE
EXPIRIENCE OF YEARS

Obviously I got it, and when I said I knew what the others had done he offered it up to me to explain. [Which I did - including the 7 ]

There was another one I'll show when he passes it on that offered up just how 'differently' puzzlers look at these sort of things by comparison to 'the rest of the world'.