Re:Nalanda: The university that changed the world
by msla on Monday March 06, 2023 @05:14PM
(#35048506)
> Bare with me here:
Most people would pay money to ensure I don't.
> Instead, we have to sift through irrelevant story-like content to get to the meat of the information and facts.
Because journalists are frustrated novelists, and editors think the "human interest" angle sells.
Re:Nalanda: The university that changed the world
by quackduck on Monday March 06, 2023 @08:22PM
(#35050274)
> editors think the "human interest" angle sells.
does it not?
Re:Nalanda: The university that changed the world
by ugh123 on Tuesday March 07, 2023 @03:39PM
(#35060886)
When "human interest" means "keep scrolling to find the content while you look over our ads" then that angle gets less and less meaningful.
Re:Nalanda: The university that changed the world
by malshe on Monday March 06, 2023 @11:03PM
(#35051404)
I found it ironic that OP started complaining about the author’s writing style by urging us to bare it all!
Re:Nalanda: The university that changed the world
by raymondgh on Monday March 06, 2023 @06:19PM
(#35049264)
I had the same reaction. I read the first line of the article and instantly knew I didn’t have the patience to find the content implied by the title. There have been discussions here about this problem for recipe sites especially. What I wonder is whether the majority of their readers (non HN people) also feel annoyed by this.
Why is it that articles need to start with lines like
> "The winter morning was cloaked in thick fog..."
and postpone the actual information pertaining to the title? Instead, we have to sift through irrelevant story-like content to get to the meat of the information and facts.
Will one promise of tools like ChatGPT and their successors be to summarize-away this fluff?