与「nonfiction」相关的搜索结果

🦑YouTube新着🦑 【顔芸】本当にいた！出禁にしたいファンpart3 #shorts# #あるある# #痛客# #コント# #ノンフィクション# #nonfiction# @YouTubeより もうpart3まで来ちゃったよ… 悪意ある顔真似😁観てね〜

이제 5분 남았네요~ 2년반만에 새앨범!! 'Nonfiction' 9/26일 PM6:00에 공개됩니다!! 타이틀곡 '실화' 꼭 들어주는걸로~ㅎ 도와주세요!! Good luck!!

The BBC journalist’s ‘The Finest Hotel in Kabul’ took the non-fiction award at the 2026 Women's Prizes, while the American novelist’s debut ‘The Correspondent’ was the judges’ fiction pick:

我越来越发现三个水枪手做的节目挺有意思，有的分析也挺有深度，这期通过对比中国、日本、美国的高校借阅榜和图书畅销榜，深入剖析了各国的阅读习惯，并得出了相对悲观的社会学结论。 一、 各国大学生及社会畅销书榜单对比 1. 中国：停滞在20年前的老书与网络爽文 山东农业大学（代表普通高校）：文学类前十名全是经典老书，如《杀死一只知更鸟》《嫌疑人X的献身》《活着》《我与地坛》《围城》。社科类前十名则充斥着“心理鸡汤”（《被讨厌的勇气》《蛤蟆先生去看心理医生》）以及《毛泽东选集》和多本《明朝那些事儿》。 清华大学（代表顶尖高校）：年度借阅榜单依然是《毛泽东选集》《红楼梦》《明朝那些事儿》《三体》《哈利波特》《平凡的世界》《乡土中国》《天龙八部》等老书。 社会总榜（当当网、微信读书）：无论怎么看，中国人买得最多的依然是这几本“老三样”（《活着》《三体》等），以及大量的教辅书、考公考证资料和儿童绘本。 网络文学榜：主播特别提到，中国大众真正阅读量极高的是晋江、起点等平台的“网络爽文”（如霸道总裁、修仙逆袭、耽美等），这些书名夸张，内容通常不需要深度思考。 2. 日本：更新极快，兼顾轻娱乐与深度哲学 东京大学：前十名借阅榜中包含大量的哲学、语言学和社科类科普书。例如《思考的整理学》（教导逻辑思维）、《闲暇与无聊的伦理学》（斯宾诺莎哲学普及）、《中动态的世界》（语言学概念），以及探讨犹太人历史的书籍。 社会总榜：日本是一大出版强国，畅销榜上的书几乎全是当年出版的新书。日本人的阅读面极广，既有海量的轻小说、推理小说、连载漫画等休闲读物，但同时，获得“本屋大赏”等严肃文学奖项的作品也能迅速在全社会大卖。 3. 美国：紧跟当下社会现实与人物传记 由于缺乏大学图书馆数据，主播主要参考了纽约时报和Goodreads的畅销榜。 非虚构类（Non-fiction）：美国人极度偏爱最新的人物传记和回忆录。榜单上充斥着格莱美得主、播客主持人、参议员的回忆录，以及关于苹果公司50年历史、AI（人工智能）前沿探索、神经科学等紧贴时代脉搏的书籍。 虚构类（Fiction）：绝大多数也是最新出版的当代小说、科幻小说（如《挽救计划》）和悬疑小说。 二、 各国人民读书习惯分析 1.美国人：通过阅读了解“现在” 美国社会的阅读习惯将其作为了解当下世界运行规律的重要窗口。读者渴望知道现在社会发生了什么，前沿科技到了什么地步，成功人士是如何思考的。因此，新出版的传记、科技科普和当代小说占据了绝对的主流。 2.日本人：将阅读作为公共生活习惯 日本人的阅读习惯是深入骨髓的。虽然在地铁上很多人看的是漫画或轻小说，但庞大的读者基数支撑起了一个健康的出版金字塔。即使是极其深度的社会学和哲学书籍，在日本也有稳定的受众。他们能够做到“娱乐阅读”与“严肃探讨”的并行。 终生阅读量极低：主播认为，绝大多数中国人可能一辈子就读了5-10本最著名的经典（如《活着》），一旦完成这些“打卡式”阅读，就不再接触新书，转而投入短视频的怀抱。中国缺乏一个持续为新书买单的成熟读者群。 功利与逃避：读书主要为了考试（教辅）或缓解心理压力（心理鸡汤）。 对真实世界的集体回避：中国读者极少阅读探讨当代社会现实深层次问题的新书或当代人物真实传记。底层大众更是沉迷于无需动脑的网络文学中寻找虚拟的情绪价值。 三、 原因 主播们在视频最后得出了一个非常悲观的结论：中国社会的整体深度阅读习惯正在走向崩溃。他们将这一现象归结为以下几个根本原因： 1.出版审查制度的负面影响：严苛的审查制度使得中国极难出版真实的当代人物传记或具有深度的非虚构社科著作（容易碰触历史定论和现实红线）。出版社为了规避风险，只能一遍遍地再版四书五经、四大名著等“安全”的老书。 2.缺乏专业权威的引导：中国缺乏像日本那样具有公信力的民间文学奖项来引导大众阅读严肃文学，导致图书市场“泥沙俱下”。 3.思辨能力的退化：在短视频的冲击和网文的包围下，年轻一代越来越排斥需要较高门槛、会带来阅读困难和认知挑战的深度严肃书籍。真正的“读书”（即通过阅读去质疑权威、探求历史真相）在中国具有一定的痛苦感甚至危险性，因此大多数人选择了回避。 PS: 1, 发达国家跟发展中国家其中一个最大的差异，还真的是民众的读书习惯和数量！多年前的一张图片，展示发达国家的人民在地铁里只看书不玩手机，后来被调侃为是因为外国的地铁手机信号差。其实信号差不差，发达国家的人民在地铁里读书的场景确实比发展中国家要常见的多。 2，发达国家的另外一个特点，就是各个群体的兴趣点非常的多样和庞杂，有喜欢看短视频的，也有喜欢看书的，相互之间基本影响不到，并且各个群体都非常的大，发展中国家就更趋于单一化，从众化。 3，我个人看书比较集中的时期只有一个就是高中阶段，为了找作文的金句和素材看通俗经典。后来大学时期以及出国后，开始看更多外国经典，但数量有限。

Ok, a few reflections on the book: 1. qntm defines antimemes as self-erasing information, but this book has a different (but related) definition of the concept: antimemes are (a) high-impact and (b) low transmissibility. Roughly, they are "important secrets". 2. The low transmissibility can be because the ideas are dense/difficult to understand (e.g. Moldbug's blog posts), or taboo/socially forbidden, or transient in some way (e.g. daylight savings time annoys people once a year, then we all forget about it example). Thus, these ideas tend to thrive in group chats and small networks of dedicated/passionate people. Eventually, the burst onto the public consciousness, sometimes in disruptive ways. 3. Original ideas are inherently antimemetic: they're very hard to transmit at first because you don't have the right language to talk about them, and they're easy to forget. This is why so few people have them at all. The most important ideas start as antimemes. 4. Generative small groups are the optimal environment for new ideas to arise and be developed. 5. Nadia defines "supermemes" as high impact / *high* transmissibility. Supermemes often present as apocalyptic in some way -- if you don't listen to this, you might literally die. Hence climate change, AI risk, war/nationalism as all cited as example supermemes. The book is very suspicious of supermemes: they suck up everyone's attention and time and result in very little constructive action; they are parasites. 5(a). "Memes" are low impact / high transmissibility. Think cat videos or brief flash-in-the-pan cultural moments that get forgotten quickly. 6. The book points out that there's often a clear "patient zero" for important ideas in the discourse: e.g. Nick C. with the jhanas, Venkatesh Rao popularizing Scott's "Seeing Like a State", and various other 'patient zeros' for now-important ideas are discussed. Ideas that survive often have Champions who talk about them persistently for many years. 7. There's a fun discussion of memetic/information warfare, and how preference cascades can be best understood. A great way to spread antimemes is to form private groups around them but not make the existence of those groups public, and have individual members of the group sometimes promote the ideas in a way that looks uncorrelated. Makes it seem that the support for the idea is more widespread than it might be initially. Eventually you reach a tipping point where it becomes socially ok to express that idea. 8. The Hayekian case for capitalism is an antimeme. Whereas communism is a supermeme: the ideas are very intuitive to everyone, unlike with capitalism where you need a lot of logic to understand how it works and why things end up being better over time. This explains why economists are so resigned to being perennially misunderstood: economic ideas are just quite hard to understand! Luckily, capitalism (a) works (b) can hook into people's greed, and so it survives, even though comparatively few people understand why. 9. It's a fun exercise to identify ideas that are 'on the cusp' / in the dark forest right now, but aren't quite fully acceptable to say out loud yet. I can think of quite a few. 10. Part of the implicit challenge of the book is "what good ideas will you be the champion of?" and "stop thinking so much about dumb culture war stuff and form more small groups to develop and propagandize the actual good ideas!". So even though the book laments the death of the open web, I also read it as pro group chat. 11. Some meta points: it's refreshing to read something that's written like a blog post, but in book form; almost all non-fiction is written in the same journalistic voice nowadays, but this one just gets to the point and packs an impressive number of insights per page. It's also great to read a book that cites the current intellectual scene, more or less as it's happening (most of the citations are URLs to blog posts). 12. Going beyond the book: many words and stories function as containers for ideas that are too complex to be put into legible language. The story of Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac in the Bible (Genesis 22) for example, is not merely a carrier for the idea "you should obey God unquestioningly". The story is more than that, but it's hard to say how except by meditating on it a lot and making it a part of yourself. Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling, one of my favorite books, is about this: the narrator, a non-believer, tries to explain the Abraham story several different ways and through various conceptual lenses (universal ethics, etc.), and concludes that it's fundamentally inexplicable in plain language. Thus the need for 'faith'. I view this as saying that the idea underlying this is real, but too high-dimensional to be flattened into any kind of explanation; it must instead be felt viscerally. Many of the most important ideas are like this.