6 ms·

This was one of the best articles I've read lately, it's not filled with empty prose as is the style today, it's just filled with the history of a man who was o

This was one of the best articles I've read lately, it's not filled with empty prose as is the style today, it's just filled with the history of a man who was one of several who founded the internet and no more. I agree with him that we need to keep iterating the foundations of the internet and keep it open and protect against the corporate takeover. I'm not sure how best to do that so I guess all I can do is work on my small areas of influence at work and in my personal projects.

rmellow 7y ago
> This was one of the best articles I've read lately, it's not filled with empty prose as is the style today. Agreed! Why is that the style today? I've heard it has something to do with SEO but I'm unsure how, or if there are other reasons. This trend makes my skimming habit so much worse, because it actually justifies skipping ahead to meaningful words.
- mannykannot 7y ago
  Writing concise prose is harder than the stream-of-consciousness style; while the former may start off as the latter, it takes a lot of editing to hone it into a sharp implement.
  - throwaway_pdp09 7y ago
    > Writing concise prose is harder than the stream-of-consciousness style... Totally true, but I think that's not what's happening. Yesterday an HN post was made about this https://lithub.com/the-wolves-of-stanislav-an-improbably-true-parable-for-the-pandemic-age/ https://lithub.com/the-wolves-of-stanislav-an-improbably-tru... It's carefully written to be like that, it's verbose by design, and I started skimming then closed it. I don't know why these timewaster articles are produced either, but it's not accident or laziness. Plenty irritating though.
    - mannykannot 7y ago
      Perhaps there's a generation that has seen little else, and takes this to be the best or only way to write? Are we teaching people to write this way, with examinations having a time limit and where, in practice, the score correlates strongly with length? (Though that has been the case for a long time.) Is concise writing taken to be difficult-textbook style, and undesirable anywhere else? Print media editors necessarily have to constrain length, and authors learned to write accordingly. Nowadays, a lot of writing is unconstrained either by physical limits or editors. The specific example you give appears to be intentionally literary in intent, and so conciseness is not necessarily a prime virtue. When authors were paid by the word, prolixity was effectively encouraged, and this is obvious in some of Poe's work.
      - apocalypstyx 7y ago
        Conciseness isn't necessarily a technological limitation. During the Victorian Era "triple-decker novels" were the in-thing. Then there's the old aphorism: Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. We want to claim that style obfuscates content. However, simplicity can also be a style that obfuscates content by its nature, just as much as any other, maybe sometimes more than any other. Maybe the problem is we want to implicitly assume that communication styles are simply accretions around the true message which exists in non-physical being, and if we could just 'read minds', everything would be perfect, and as with Gnosticism, the 'Truth' gets weighed down with the sin of physicality (wrapped up in words in this case). So we try to be verbal ascetics, throwing our sentences, rather than our bodies, in the ovens to strip flesh. When in reality the words do not convey like boxcars carrying grain, but are the thing in themselves and solely such. So maybe this ends up back at a kind of radical materialism, a world were nothing is backed by the pure truth of God (or, in this case, 'pure information').
        mannykannot 7y ago
        > Conciseness isn't necessarily a technological limitation. Of course not, but I doubt that it is entirely coincidental that the article here is from a well-established print journal. > However, simplicity can also be a style that obfuscates content by its nature. Occasionally, in response to an editorial mandate, I have condensed something to the point where even I have difficulty following it after some time has passed. The point here, however, is that this article is both concise and clear. > When in reality the words do not convey like boxcars carrying grain... Indeed; if they did, style would not be an issue, and grammar would not be a thing. >... but are the thing in themselves and solely such. Words in themselves are nothing without an accepted vocabulary.
- ghaff 7y ago
  I doubt SEO which, in addition to metadata and so forth, is mostly about using terminology that people search for. A lot of people naturally ramble and there are also certainly quality magazines that go for a longer more literary style (e.g. The New Yorker) that you apparently don't care for. The Economist, while it likes its clever turns of phrase, especially in headlines, is both well-written/edited and direct.
  - rmellow 7y ago
    The fact you pointed out the New Yorker makes me happy I've expressed my thoughts well. I had exactly that example in mind.
eru 7y ago
The Economist is quite proud of their signature concise style. If you like that kind of writing, you can consider subscribing. (I used to read it cover to cover as a uni student, but have since grown out of it.)
- ghaff 7y ago
  I do subscribe and enjoy it. On the other hand, I definitely don't read it cover to cover. I imagine they're the most comprehensive magazine in the world in covering political and business affairs in places that I imagine a lot of people would have trouble finding on a map. And there's a limit to how much time I'm going to spend reading about those sorts of topics that just aren't all that interesting (or important) to me.
  - eru 7y ago
    I had more time as a student.

rmellow 7y ago

> This was one of the best articles I've read lately, it's not filled with empty prose as is the style today. Agreed! Why is that the style today? I've heard it has something to do with SEO but I'm unsure how, or if there are other reasons. This trend makes my skimming habit so much worse, because it actually justifies skipping ahead to meaningful words.

mannykannot 7y ago
Writing concise prose is harder than the stream-of-consciousness style; while the former may start off as the latter, it takes a lot of editing to hone it into a sharp implement.
- throwaway_pdp09 7y ago
  > Writing concise prose is harder than the stream-of-consciousness style... Totally true, but I think that's not what's happening. Yesterday an HN post was made about this https://lithub.com/the-wolves-of-stanislav-an-improbably-true-parable-for-the-pandemic-age/ https://lithub.com/the-wolves-of-stanislav-an-improbably-tru... It's carefully written to be like that, it's verbose by design, and I started skimming then closed it. I don't know why these timewaster articles are produced either, but it's not accident or laziness. Plenty irritating though.
  - mannykannot 7y ago
    Perhaps there's a generation that has seen little else, and takes this to be the best or only way to write? Are we teaching people to write this way, with examinations having a time limit and where, in practice, the score correlates strongly with length? (Though that has been the case for a long time.) Is concise writing taken to be difficult-textbook style, and undesirable anywhere else? Print media editors necessarily have to constrain length, and authors learned to write accordingly. Nowadays, a lot of writing is unconstrained either by physical limits or editors. The specific example you give appears to be intentionally literary in intent, and so conciseness is not necessarily a prime virtue. When authors were paid by the word, prolixity was effectively encouraged, and this is obvious in some of Poe's work.
    - apocalypstyx 7y ago
      Conciseness isn't necessarily a technological limitation. During the Victorian Era "triple-decker novels" were the in-thing. Then there's the old aphorism: Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. We want to claim that style obfuscates content. However, simplicity can also be a style that obfuscates content by its nature, just as much as any other, maybe sometimes more than any other. Maybe the problem is we want to implicitly assume that communication styles are simply accretions around the true message which exists in non-physical being, and if we could just 'read minds', everything would be perfect, and as with Gnosticism, the 'Truth' gets weighed down with the sin of physicality (wrapped up in words in this case). So we try to be verbal ascetics, throwing our sentences, rather than our bodies, in the ovens to strip flesh. When in reality the words do not convey like boxcars carrying grain, but are the thing in themselves and solely such. So maybe this ends up back at a kind of radical materialism, a world were nothing is backed by the pure truth of God (or, in this case, 'pure information').
      - mannykannot 7y ago
        > Conciseness isn't necessarily a technological limitation. Of course not, but I doubt that it is entirely coincidental that the article here is from a well-established print journal. > However, simplicity can also be a style that obfuscates content by its nature. Occasionally, in response to an editorial mandate, I have condensed something to the point where even I have difficulty following it after some time has passed. The point here, however, is that this article is both concise and clear. > When in reality the words do not convey like boxcars carrying grain... Indeed; if they did, style would not be an issue, and grammar would not be a thing. >... but are the thing in themselves and solely such. Words in themselves are nothing without an accepted vocabulary.
ghaff 7y ago
I doubt SEO which, in addition to metadata and so forth, is mostly about using terminology that people search for. A lot of people naturally ramble and there are also certainly quality magazines that go for a longer more literary style (e.g. The New Yorker) that you apparently don't care for. The Economist, while it likes its clever turns of phrase, especially in headlines, is both well-written/edited and direct.
- rmellow 7y ago
  The fact you pointed out the New Yorker makes me happy I've expressed my thoughts well. I had exactly that example in mind.

eru 7y ago

The Economist is quite proud of their signature concise style. If you like that kind of writing, you can consider subscribing. (I used to read it cover to cover as a uni student, but have since grown out of it.)

ghaff 7y ago
I do subscribe and enjoy it. On the other hand, I definitely don't read it cover to cover. I imagine they're the most comprehensive magazine in the world in covering political and business affairs in places that I imagine a lot of people would have trouble finding on a map. And there's a limit to how much time I'm going to spend reading about those sorts of topics that just aren't all that interesting (or important) to me.
- eru 7y ago
  I had more time as a student.