42 ms·
IMHO this article is terrible. Aside from the atrocious size it both meanders along on screen-length paragraphs and then jumps between decades, characters, and
by sqldba 11y ago
IMHO this article is terrible.
Aside from the atrocious size it both meanders along on screen-length paragraphs and then jumps between decades, characters, and quotes.
Who the hell can read something like this? Word count and editing matters even if we don't have physical pages to constrain the text anymore.
Sloppy sloppy journalism.
- hjek 11y agoHaving only read the first half, I find the article interesting and well-written, especially Minsky's quote on how belief in 'free will' is based on an incomplete understanding on human activity; and also how he wires up the circuits to use audio for debugging (That is such a cool idea). Who the hell can read something like this and not enjoy it? Gonna read last half now. By the way, how is this to make sense?: > Word count and editing matters even if we don't have physical pages to constrain the text anymore. It's written in 1981, it says on the top. With lines like these, it should be difficult to overlook: "Several times while I was there, Minsky paused to read his “mail”—messages on the terminal’s printout system."
- Outdoorsman 11y agoAgreed...current attention spans, well, they're not what they used to be... The New Yorker, through the years, has produced as much quality long-form content as any magazine in the history of North American journalism...this article is no exception...I'll leave it at that...
- cbd1984 11y agoIt's amazing how attention spans have been declining for the entire history of the human race. It beggars belief that we could have declined so far and still have the ability to bemoan the young.