5 ms·
It is lazy, but only if the summaries are replacing actually reading the content. Also a summary is only as good as it is accurate. If the piece being summariz
by tj-teej 9y ago
It is lazy, but only if the summaries are replacing actually reading the content.
Also a summary is only as good as it is accurate. If the piece being summarized has sufficient nuance it can't be summarized well, or is at a higher risk of being summarized incorrectly.
There's a joke here somewhere about judging a book by its cover.
- ethbro 9y agoThis is the mandatory class attendence problem from college in a nutshell: if you have to require people to attend class, then you're obviously not delivering value in class. If a summary covers all the relevant information in the article, then actually reading the article is a waste of time. And note how GP used compression to excise pieces that would be repetitious for an average HN reader.
- jessriedel 9y agoDifferent articles are worthwhile to different people. Abstracts help people find content they are interested in, reduces incentives for clickbait and burying the lede, and focus discussion on the main points. Of course bad summaries can be bad for the discussion, but that's what downvotes and criticism is for. The same is true for normal comments.