Comment by apparent
2 hours ago
> Yes, but do you only do things for pleasure if they're done quickly? Is your sex always over in a minute?
This is a valid critique, but the motivations are not the same for reading books and gambling. Both are done partly for entertainment, but reading is partly for edification whereas gambling is partly for making money (in theory, at least). People want to make money almost universally, whereas ongoing edification is something that people do not enjoy intrinsically (meaning they would do it less if it takes more time).
> Yes, reading for pleasure "on any given day" is a different measure than "placed a bet last year", but "read a book of any kind in 2022" is the same length of time, though not the exact same year.
I critiqued the two comparisons separately for a reason. One conflated a time-consuming activity with a quick one, and the other conflated time periods of comparison. I do not claim that both critiques apply to both cases, just that each comparison is flawed.
> reading is partly for edification
Not necessarily. Is Harry Potter for edification? Trashy romance novels?
In any case, the article specifically notes that reading for pleasure, a subset of all reading, has declined.
> One conflated a time-consuming activity with a quick one, and the other conflated time periods of comparison.
There was no conflation by the article.
You presented a selective quotation that omitted the yearly book reading stats and attempted to argue misleadingly that the article was comparing a daily time scale to a yearly time scale.
I think you missed the point of the reading vs. gambling comparison. From the article: "Gambling has become [emphasis mine] a more common leisure activity than reading a book." In other words, the change is the point. Gambling was not always more popular than reading.
Nit picking around the edges doesn't undermine the general point. The comparisons were bad. You have succeeded in pointing out that they were not as bad as they possibly could have been, which I guess makes you feel good? Anyway, I'll leave it here since I don't enjoy engaging with people like you on HN.
> The comparisons were bad.
The comparisons were fine. I guess it makes you feel good to tell yourself that I was "nit picking around the edges", but I was actually disagreeing with you 100%.