No, it's confusing enough already that this post is filled with obsolete NPR and NPR-quoting comments. (Though I appreciate that your change wasn't done invisibly!)

I think it would be better to let someone submit the paper separately, or for us all to just upvote your comment.

People say this a lot, but it isn't clear to me how this would work. Would you like to discuss it? Email to [email protected] is probably best so we don't disrupt the thread.

Edit: Oops, version conflict. I was talking about a bit you edited out (about multiple links).

Annoying, isn't it? :)

I know much better than to play Reddit with you.

This might be a situation where a story merge feature would come in handy.

In a "merged thread" the title could have more than one link value (but still have a canonical (by mod standard) top ranked url.) And the discussion could be merged to one thread (or version controlled in correspondence with a particular top level link.)

I also think it would have some other benefits:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7564254

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7564289

I'd say most people definitely don't have time for the extra effort of reading original papers.

Whenever this is important to me I'll get the link from the comments.

Also given NPR also interviewed Downey so 'value added' I wouldn't have necessarily given Technology Review preference.

That's how I personally use HN too, which is why I didn't make the paper itself the primary link. Good point about it almost always being referenced in the thread.

> NPR also interviewed Downey so 'value added'

Fair, but I'm doubtful many people here listen to the audio.

Thank you :) . I think linking to the paper would be best.