I hate it almost as much as the ‘soft lede’, where the author decides to spend a few paragraphs describing the weather and kind of jacket the subject of their article is wearing before they get to the point. Maybe it’s SEO, but it just gives me the impression that the author had a failed career as a novelist, and wants to waste my time as an outlet for their creative writing impulses.

Or maybe that's their writing style and the story they're writing?

I'm not usually dismissive, but honestly, people are free to write the article as they wish to, and we're free to read it or not. It always annoys me when people complain about recipe sites for example "I don't want to know what clothes you were wearing when you cooked it, just give me the measurements".

> waste my time as an outlet for their creative writing impulses

What gives us the right to demand something from a writer that isn't what they were writing?

It might be cynical SEO stuff, or it might just be how they like to write - but there are a lot of commenters here that won't be happy until everything is just AI-produced bullet-points.

If a writer is truly writing for themselves, they are the audience: why post it for the public? Otherwise the audience's IS the only judgement that matters.

In the case of this kind of soft/no lede, it comes off as narcissistic and time-wasting, a side-effect of having no editor to determine what is good for the publication, and no cost to cost publish an unlimited stream-of-consciousness.

The AI isn't in the "bullet-points" but in the search engine that does not differentiate well between a key term hit above the fold or spread over the broad middle of an article.

> why post it for the public?

Why not?

> the only judgement that matters.

Not really - you can have multiple target audiences. I.e. you can write for yourself first, and others second - the piece being relevant, with different focuses, for different people. Which is what the majority of these pieces tend to be (if they're not purely SEO gaming)

> narcissistic and time-wasting, a side-effect of having no editor to determine what is good for the publication, and no cost to cost publish an unlimited stream-of-consciousness

What's the problem with any of that? Is everything in life to be optimised purely for efficiency of delivery?

> The AI isn't in the "bullet-points" but in the search engine

My point was rather that some people here would rather boil everything down to purely a list of facts, without any element of story or framing.

> What gives us the right to demand something from a writer that isn't what they were writing?

I’m not demanding anything, I’m just making a statement about my personal taste. If I click on an article, it’s because the headline interested me. If I start reading it to find the content is not at all related to that headline, I just feel annoyed and usually close the page.

I like that style, when it's done well! I agree it has a novel-esque feel, but that's not a bad thing IMO.

I can see how it would be annoying if you're looking for something specific, but not all articles are written to be consumed in the same way.

Yepppp. I hate these two, and I'm a novelist myself (well, I pretend to be sometimes).

I like it that way, it reads like a story and it IS a good story. Not everything in tech or HN has to be to the point and a collection of facts, some narrativity is ok

This is what books and novels are for

That's a little reductive, short form writings/storytellings do infact exist, and can also be wildly popular, Isaac Asimov's The Last Answer immediately comes to mind.

I had the same suspicion from seeing the title and didnt bother to read the article, just came here check the company name.