[Yenrabbit]

I've always found this interesting. Think+transmit seems more likely to be the bottleneck vs receive, given that we can easily parse most podcasts etc at 3-4X speed. If being understood by everyone wasn't required, I wonder if one could learn to boost both send and receive rates?

[wenc]

I usually listen at 1.5x passively.

But what you said made me curious. I listened to this podcast at 3x. I was able to understand all the words, but my conceptual understanding decreased. I also have to listen actively -- not passively.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SFkwdm0PP0

At 4x, I could only understand the shape of the sentences but could no longer make out the words. But I turned on the captions and found I could keep up. Turns out reading at 4x works, listening at 4x doesn't.

English is also spoken with different prosodies and cadences. For instance, I can understand Singaporean English perfectly, but it's less amenable to being sped up. I tried listening to this lecture in Singaporean English in 3x and found that I could barely understand it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA1dnUYzRWU

[manusachi]

Blind people often go upto 600 words per minute and more with text-to-speech, which is, I think, would be an equivalent to 5x and more.

[yjftsjthsd-h]

In fairness, they cannibalize their visual cortex to do that:)

[sooheon]

There's the cue for my biennial reread of Peter Watts' Blindsight.

[kamarg]

Did you read his followup Echopraxia? How would you say it compared to Blindsight?

[sooheon]

I've read Blindsight multiple times, and weirdly couldn't finish Echopraxia. Maybe this time.

[Bluestein]

Went into my list. Appreciated :)

[bryanrasmussen]

I'm pretty sure you can train yourself to do the same, but the effort probably doesn't seem worth it for most people.

[worthless-trash]

But its robotic and predictable, human speech is not.

[throw0101d]

> I usually listen at 1.5x passively.

Eminem's song "Rap God" has a segment where he goes at about 6 words per second (@4m23s):

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbGs_qK2PQA

[BizarroLand]

Racine sings the english translation of the Disappearance of Hatsune Miku much faster:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tohDycgc-H8

However, there is a difference between a rehearsed and practiced performance and communication that makes these things more a feat of acrobatics.

[throw0101d]

For a time in the 1980s John Moschitta was well-known for making fast-talking commercials:

* FedEx: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeK5ZjtpO-M

* Micro Machines: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gzd11GMBONg

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Moschitta_Jr.

[digitalsushi]

i can catch a single fastball. sometimes. i cant catch 1 per second

[Bluestein]

1.7x here as a matter of course.-

PS. I wonder if, even peripheralally, having one of 'em newfangled AI glasses teleprompting you at the same time, could get one up to 2.0x or higher.-

[Buttons840]

This suggest that maybe human minds are able to form ideas at a certain speed, and language has evolved to convey these ideas and not be a bottleneck, but there is no reason to improve language beyond this.

[Auracle]

Hm, I’ve always struggled with the other bottleneck - speaking. I tend to slur my words because my brain is forming the thoughts faster than I can speak. I could perhaps speed up my speech to match my brain but I’d sound like a maniac.

Don’t get me started on writing. My letters will often transition halfway into a letter thats 3 words ahead.

[HPsquared]

Typing speed is a good thing to develop.

[ajb]

Likely so. I've noticed that those whose first language is one of those with fewer vowels - and thus must have more syllables per second to convey the same information rate- sometimes speak English much faster than I (as a monolingual native speaker) find normal.

[0cf8612b2e1e]

3-4x! Are you the flash? I usually run things about 1.5x when I am commuting. 3x would require laser focus without distractions. Or you mean more a “can technically absorb the language being spoken” sense?

[pbh101]

Not OP but listen to podcasts at highly accelerated settings:

The information density of ‘two dudes talking’ or any unscripted format is very low, so it time-compresses well. Specific podcasts, typically scripted monologues with technical content, such as Causality [0] (recommended!), I need to listen to much slower. Ditto if it is in an accent which isn’t mine, which slows my comprehension. I also slow the speed if I’m driving. So, yes, it takes mental overhead, but is doable. Go one click at a time and it will feel natural.

[0]: https://engineered.network/causality/

[0cf8612b2e1e]

I suppose the format is a huge differentiator. I exclusively listen to highly produced content which has essentially no dead time. The content is already a compressed transmission of information.

[wuschel]

I would say that the ability and speed to receive and process information in a timely manner also greatly depends on the density and complexity of the material.