As a parent of a toddler and a baby, this article bothers me to bits.<p>The author somehow seems to implicitly assumes that being able to read as early as possible is good, period. Younger == better. He has a huge &quot;why&quot; chapter, where he debunks and defends all kinds of criticism he&#x27;s gotten, but I haven&#x27;t been able to at all find the section where he simply describes <i>why it&#x27;s a good idea</i>. Not why it&#x27;s <i>not not</i> a good idea, that&#x27;s not good enough. Why would I teach my children to read already?<p>There might be good reasons, but this author is so consumed with the &quot;it&#x27;s possible! it&#x27;s not harmful!&quot; part of things that what should have been the central argument is nearly entirely missing.<p>I mean, seriously, it&#x27;s possible and it&#x27;s not harmful? I can think of a <i>lot</i> of things that are possible and not harmful but still wouldn&#x27;t do with my kids.