4 ms·

This is a bit of a meta-comment but, there are a great deal of of comments in this thread that say something that's already covered in the article. I've notice

by Nition 3y ago

This is a bit of a meta-comment but, there are a great deal of of comments in this thread that say something that's already covered in the article. I've noticed that Hacker News comments do seem to be trending more over time to being from people who only read the title, or at best only skimmed the article. If you go straight to the comments on any news post on Reddit, the discussions usually seem relatively insightful, but if you read the article and then the comments, suddenly many of them seem ridiculous. Either they're discussing questions that are already answered in the article or covering topics that are completely irrelevant. Often they're interpreting the article in completely the wrong way.. I've always much appreciated that Hacker News is not like that and most comments are responding to parts of the article itself. I hope we don't end up that way eventually.

doublerabbit 3y ago
I'm guilty. I'm just here for the comments. I tend to learn more about the subject that way. And if I find the comments confusing I'll then jump to the article. Partly due to the popup spam on any major media outlet site, even wikipedia with its constant nagging for donations. Downvotes: Not sure why some HN readers are upset by this comment, I don't have time to read every article or to skim. Especially at work. Reading articles on mobile hurts my eyes, it's easier to get an understanding via comments.
- Nition 3y ago
  Honestly I think going straight to the comments is totally fine, as long as you read the article (or at least skim it, please) before posting your own top-level comment. I'm not sure why you're downvoted either really, because you're not doing any harm by just reading them. However, your method does become less useful if the comments that people do post become increasing divorced from the article! Sometimes on Reddit people almost create their own alternate reality in the comments based only on the title. When we only read the comments we end up living in that reality.
potsandpans 3y ago
My unsubstantiated hypothesis is that this is a direct correlation to the reddit api changes.
deadbabe 3y ago
Comments are at least more guaranteed to be human, articles could be AI summary garbage.
- Nition 3y ago
  This article is quite the opposite of that though, and has done a lot of work covering most of the points that are being made in the comments here anyway. The Aramaic words, the similar verse in the Quran, the rope being "still impossible" etc, are all covered in the article.
- DontchaKnowit 3y ago
  What? Wouldnt comments be equally likely to be AI? Why would comments be any less likely to be AI?
  - deadbabe 3y ago
    No money to be made, so why bother?
citizenpaul 3y ago
Its a known effect of the popularity of online social networks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
hot_gril 3y ago
I've repeatedly noticed an even worse practice on anything news-related on Reddit: Top-rated comments saying "the title is misleading" when it actually isn't. I don't know if they skimmed the article way too quickly or were just trying to call it fake news because they didn't like it. Anyway, deleted my account there and haven't gone back in a few months.
- Nition 3y ago
  It's a funny thing psychologically. I think it makes us feel smart to upvote the person saying it's all nonsense. Feels like now we're one level up in understanding. And that feeling makes it even harder to think about how maybe the comment is wrong and the article/title was right after all.
  - spacebacon 3y ago
    I assume most everyone here on their free and unpaid time is here for entertainment purposes. Why waste time reading an article if the title already provides enough entertainment for a creative dialog?
    - hot_gril 3y ago
      I'm not going to pretend that I read the article every time. But if I'm going to point out something I think the article is missing or accuse the title of being false, yeah I'll check the article first.
      - spacebacon 3y ago
        In my opinion a title should properly reflect the compressed contents of the article accurately and in full. If the title is just a setup for answering a question we all already probably knew anyway then it is simply click bait.
      - Nition 3y ago
        Thanks, this is indeed all I'm looking for.

by Nition 3y ago

doublerabbit 3y ago

I'm guilty. I'm just here for the comments. I tend to learn more about the subject that way. And if I find the comments confusing I'll then jump to the article. Partly due to the popup spam on any major media outlet site, even wikipedia with its constant nagging for donations. Downvotes: Not sure why some HN readers are upset by this comment, I don't have time to read every article or to skim. Especially at work. Reading articles on mobile hurts my eyes, it's easier to get an understanding via comments.

Nition 3y ago
Honestly I think going straight to the comments is totally fine, as long as you read the article (or at least skim it, please) before posting your own top-level comment. I'm not sure why you're downvoted either really, because you're not doing any harm by just reading them. However, your method does become less useful if the comments that people do post become increasing divorced from the article! Sometimes on Reddit people almost create their own alternate reality in the comments based only on the title. When we only read the comments we end up living in that reality.

potsandpans 3y ago

My unsubstantiated hypothesis is that this is a direct correlation to the reddit api changes.

deadbabe 3y ago

Comments are at least more guaranteed to be human, articles could be AI summary garbage.

Nition 3y ago
This article is quite the opposite of that though, and has done a lot of work covering most of the points that are being made in the comments here anyway. The Aramaic words, the similar verse in the Quran, the rope being "still impossible" etc, are all covered in the article.
DontchaKnowit 3y ago
What? Wouldnt comments be equally likely to be AI? Why would comments be any less likely to be AI?
- deadbabe 3y ago
  No money to be made, so why bother?

citizenpaul 3y ago

Its a known effect of the popularity of online social networks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

hot_gril 3y ago

I've repeatedly noticed an even worse practice on anything news-related on Reddit: Top-rated comments saying "the title is misleading" when it actually isn't. I don't know if they skimmed the article way too quickly or were just trying to call it fake news because they didn't like it. Anyway, deleted my account there and haven't gone back in a few months.

Nition 3y ago
It's a funny thing psychologically. I think it makes us feel smart to upvote the person saying it's all nonsense. Feels like now we're one level up in understanding. And that feeling makes it even harder to think about how maybe the comment is wrong and the article/title was right after all.
- spacebacon 3y ago
  I assume most everyone here on their free and unpaid time is here for entertainment purposes. Why waste time reading an article if the title already provides enough entertainment for a creative dialog?
  - hot_gril 3y ago
    I'm not going to pretend that I read the article every time. But if I'm going to point out something I think the article is missing or accuse the title of being false, yeah I'll check the article first.
    - spacebacon 3y ago
      In my opinion a title should properly reflect the compressed contents of the article accurately and in full. If the title is just a setup for answering a question we all already probably knew anyway then it is simply click bait.
    - Nition 3y ago
      Thanks, this is indeed all I'm looking for.