> It sounds like you took the primary criticism in the parent comment to be about reading in general.
I took it as being about this website or something the website represents. I do hope no one is against reading in general.
> I took it to mean that the best way to learn (…) start by googling a specific aspect
People learn different subjects in different ways. Perhaps googling fits some people and some subjects, but if you don’t know anything about a field you don’t know which questions it makes sense to search for or which websites to trust.
> but I think there's also a false promise of knowledge offered by sites like this.
I don’t get that at all from this particular website. They’re quite open that they’re presenting “the best books as recommended by X”. The person doing the recommendation is an integral part, they are interviews.
Yep fair points. I should say, given this is hackernews there's every chance you might know the person who made this and if you are coming at it from something like this angle, I can understand your frustration.
The site is a nice idea and does what it says honestly and well. I certainly don't have anything bad to say about the people who like it or who made it.
My feeling towards these sites is more of a personal frustration I have with the advertisement of books in general - whether that be through good reads, best seller lists, book stores etc.
I often find myself making lists of books to read like this but all it ever results in is me beating myself up for never getting around to them. On the other hand, the way I have actually learnt things has always been through googling an interest and following the thread. Often the thread leads me to reading a book or two. But rarely does the thread lead me to needing to find the top 5 books on x.
For me these sites mostly just create a sense of guilt for not having read the relevant "must read" books.
I suspect this is what's behind OPs frustration at the idea of "ticking off" books on a list.
I took it as being about this website or something the website represents. I do hope no one is against reading in general.
> I took it to mean that the best way to learn (…) start by googling a specific aspect
People learn different subjects in different ways. Perhaps googling fits some people and some subjects, but if you don’t know anything about a field you don’t know which questions it makes sense to search for or which websites to trust.
> but I think there's also a false promise of knowledge offered by sites like this.
I don’t get that at all from this particular website. They’re quite open that they’re presenting “the best books as recommended by X”. The person doing the recommendation is an integral part, they are interviews.