5 ms·

Yes, it's pretty obvious that lots of HN readers don't actually read the article.

craftyguy 7y ago
At this point, it should be an official HN rule: "do not read the article, go directly to the comments and speculate what the article is about based on the character-limited title"
- samstave 7y ago
  Well, TBF, thats the generally normal forum behaviour when you 'know your audience' For example, know that most HNers are fairly informed individuals in tech. Thus, I trust that I am going to find a good deal of content and insightful comments without reading the article - because I can typically glean the gist of the article and the tidbits that would have interested me anyway, from the HN community.
  - craftyguy 7y ago
    > For example, know that most HNers are fairly informed individuals in tech Ha. If that were true, why are there hourly front-page articles about "facebook is leaking your info!!!" and "google is evil!!", or my favorite "bitcoin {is,isn't} a great thing!!" ? At the risk of angering folks and being downvoted/flagged, I think either there is a major disconnect between the types of people on HN that upvote articles and the people on HN who comment on articles, OR folks here are, on average, not as informed as you think they are.
    - samstave 7y ago
      Because if youre also well informed you should be able to filter those super easily!
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  For many of us, submitted articles are just social objects for provoking a discussion on particular topics. Also, sometimes the articles are really worth a read, other times they're garbage; usually they're something in-between. Going straight to comments is the fastest way to discover which is which. Commenting without reading the article is fine. Speculating about what's in the article without having read it is a problem.
  - Shivetya 7y ago
    so we're reddit, just without the memes? that does seem a bit disappointing. I think anyone simply quoting the article needs to explicitly show that that is the case because it was very misleading. still this article was fascinating to me, from the idea that someone would go to the effort to the results of such effort. then top off my fascination with the idea of trying elsewhere in the country should there be more than one manufacturing point or trying to buy up a production lot as seeing the results of that as well. Now how many packs of M&Ms? There are six colors there. If you go with the peanut version it probably is worse because they you have the variability of the peanuts which would make the chances of encountering packs with more variation in just the number of candies.
    - nurettin 7y ago
      >> so we're reddit, just without the memes? HN has memes. Turning unlikely things into SaaS, Rust/Crystal strike force and bikeshedding are all too real here. And now apparently not reading source material has that potential as well. Which is kind of hilarious.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      > so we're reddit, just without the memes? Kind of? And with slightly higher average standards of discourse? And I believe this is actually a compliment. In my experience, HN comments under article are almost always more useful and more informative than the original article. The same is the case with various subreddits. When I read, say, /r/SpaceX, I also immediately jump into comments, as there is better quality info there. This applies to mainstream news stories in particular. On HN, there's a good chance you'll find someone who was - or knows someone who was - involved in the topic first-hand, and who then proceeds to debunk various nonsense a typical news story contains. That's a huge value-added. > I think anyone simply quoting the article needs to explicitly show that that is the case because it was very misleading. Sure, I think making it clear what text is quoted (and from where) should be an obvious rule. And it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not others read the article; it simply saves brain cycles trying to understand the comment.
hjk05 7y ago
Plenty of other sites exist that link to content. I don’t come to HN for that, I come to HN for the forum and their take on the content. Which in my opinion just isn’t matched by any other place these days. (Though if anyone wants to share a contrary oppinion I’d love to hear about those!)
bookofjoe 7y ago
I will go out on a limb and speculate that even more don't read the directions.

At this point, it should be an official HN rule: "do not read the article, go directly to the comments and speculate what the article is about based on the character-limited title"

samstave 7y ago
Well, TBF, thats the generally normal forum behaviour when you 'know your audience' For example, know that most HNers are fairly informed individuals in tech. Thus, I trust that I am going to find a good deal of content and insightful comments without reading the article - because I can typically glean the gist of the article and the tidbits that would have interested me anyway, from the HN community.
- craftyguy 7y ago
  > For example, know that most HNers are fairly informed individuals in tech Ha. If that were true, why are there hourly front-page articles about "facebook is leaking your info!!!" and "google is evil!!", or my favorite "bitcoin {is,isn't} a great thing!!" ? At the risk of angering folks and being downvoted/flagged, I think either there is a major disconnect between the types of people on HN that upvote articles and the people on HN who comment on articles, OR folks here are, on average, not as informed as you think they are.
  - samstave 7y ago
    Because if youre also well informed you should be able to filter those super easily!
TeMPOraL 7y ago
For many of us, submitted articles are just social objects for provoking a discussion on particular topics. Also, sometimes the articles are really worth a read, other times they're garbage; usually they're something in-between. Going straight to comments is the fastest way to discover which is which. Commenting without reading the article is fine. Speculating about what's in the article without having read it is a problem.
- Shivetya 7y ago
  so we're reddit, just without the memes? that does seem a bit disappointing. I think anyone simply quoting the article needs to explicitly show that that is the case because it was very misleading. still this article was fascinating to me, from the idea that someone would go to the effort to the results of such effort. then top off my fascination with the idea of trying elsewhere in the country should there be more than one manufacturing point or trying to buy up a production lot as seeing the results of that as well. Now how many packs of M&Ms? There are six colors there. If you go with the peanut version it probably is worse because they you have the variability of the peanuts which would make the chances of encountering packs with more variation in just the number of candies.
  - nurettin 7y ago
    >> so we're reddit, just without the memes? HN has memes. Turning unlikely things into SaaS, Rust/Crystal strike force and bikeshedding are all too real here. And now apparently not reading source material has that potential as well. Which is kind of hilarious.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > so we're reddit, just without the memes? Kind of? And with slightly higher average standards of discourse? And I believe this is actually a compliment. In my experience, HN comments under article are almost always more useful and more informative than the original article. The same is the case with various subreddits. When I read, say, /r/SpaceX, I also immediately jump into comments, as there is better quality info there. This applies to mainstream news stories in particular. On HN, there's a good chance you'll find someone who was - or knows someone who was - involved in the topic first-hand, and who then proceeds to debunk various nonsense a typical news story contains. That's a huge value-added. > I think anyone simply quoting the article needs to explicitly show that that is the case because it was very misleading. Sure, I think making it clear what text is quoted (and from where) should be an obvious rule. And it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not others read the article; it simply saves brain cycles trying to understand the comment.

hjk05 7y ago

Plenty of other sites exist that link to content. I don’t come to HN for that, I come to HN for the forum and their take on the content. Which in my opinion just isn’t matched by any other place these days. (Though if anyone wants to share a contrary oppinion I’d love to hear about those!)

bookofjoe 7y ago

I will go out on a limb and speculate that even more don't read the directions.