3 ms·
That says nothing about if it's worth reading the article. I wish every article came with an abstract and conclusion like a scientific paper. Generally that's
by akvadrako 8y ago
That says nothing about if it's worth reading the article.
I wish every article came with an abstract and conclusion like a scientific paper. Generally that's enough and you don't even need to read the middle.
- TeMPOraL 8y agoThat was supposed to be gold standard. The "inverted pyramid"[0]. It's taught to journalists as very important. It's also universally ignored everywhere. I've seen one news source do that, by putting a bullet-point summary at the beginning of the article. Sadly, I don't remember which one was that (I don't usually pay attention to who is writing, when an article lands on HN). Most others prefer to do the inverse - bait you with the headline, make the beginning confusing, and only later on reveal the important details. -- [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_pyramid_(journalism) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_pyramid_(journalism)
- j2kun 8y agoYour scrutiny of the worth of scientific results must be spot on! You can tell from the first few sentences or paragraphs whether an article is worth reading. If you're not interested you stop reading it!