6 ms·

I stopped after the first 3 slides, since the information density is too low and the animation too slow.

by ctenb 2y ago

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> the information density is too low You failed the marshmallow test [1]. There is a traditional, long-form article that presents a rewarding read. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experiment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experim...
- generalizations 2y ago
  Marshmallow test assumes the payoff exists and is worth it. Does it? Is it? IDK and I don't want to waste time finding out. I'm far more interested in information-dense sources that let me find out if I want to know what it's offering. That's why journal articles have abstracts.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Does it? Is it? IDK and I don't want to waste time finding out This is what goes through the toddlers’ heads too! Gauging credibility is inextricably entangled with patience and Kahmeman’s System 2 thinking [1][2]. If this were a random article, sure, you shouldn’t trust. But it’s not. It’s on HN’s front page. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/ [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
    - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
      The Internet is full of non-marshmallows though, I'm not gonna wait around forever for a haribo
    - generalizations 2y ago
      Given how many non-marshmallow articles are out there on the internet, and your apparent risk-reward ratio, I wonder if you're the one failing the test. And you haven't really justified your original claim that GP failed the marshmallow test.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > how many non-marshmallow articles are out there on the internet Most of the HN front page aren’t marshmallows. If you believe they are, it’s irrational to be here, let alone waste time commenting about it.
        generalizations 2y ago
        The contents of the HN front page is determined by the HN readers, and is not uniformly interesting to all of them. It is up to the article presented to the users to prove that it is worth the time to read and deserves to be on the front page, and this one doesn't to a great job of that. The marshmallow test should have a follow up, where the person offering the marshmallow has to prove credibility, and the person receiving it has to decide if it's worth waiting. Would be an interesting view of human interactions.
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > marshmallow test should have a follow up, where the person offering the marshmallow has to prove credibility This thread is becoming a parody of itself. I linked to literally this study above [1][2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40076494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40076494 [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/
      - prepend 2y ago
        I think GP just wants you to be smart enough to commend them for knowing of the marshmallow test but not smart enough to know if the reference is applicable.
    - thefz 2y ago
      I agree with OP that this presentation is very irritating.
    - prepend 2y ago
      Toddlers are told they will get two marshmallows if they wait. This is like “you can have a headache now and, if you wait, might get something later, perhaps a punch in the face, perhaps a slice of pie, perhaps nothing.”
- flybrand 2y ago
  The kid can see the marshmallow. I can’t see the payoff from this article. The kid knows what the payoff is. The payoff here is unknown.
- Kalium 2y ago
  The article fails the marshmallow test - it needs to convince people that there is a traditional, long-form article that will be a rewarding read from the start. Only then is the test relevant to humans. Otherwise, all that's really being tested is the reader's trust in the publisher.
- ajdude 2y ago
  I really hate how articles are starting with full page slides and animations now. This is the third article that I've seen this week following the format. I suppose since two of those three were on the HN front page it's a format that works, but I guess I'm not the target audience.
  - kwhitefoot 2y ago
    This one is different from most. The visual design is consistent, engaging, and well done. The pictures are relevant and interesting and complement the text. I agree that most articles that start with slides are just dross, this one is an exception.
- jasode 2y ago
  >You failed the marshmallow test [1]. There is a traditional, long-form article that presents a rewarding read. I didn't downvote but reading an unknown article with unknown or non-existent payoff is not the same premise as The Marshmallow Test because the Stanford experiment explicitly specifies the "reward" upfront: ">, a child was offered a choice between one small but immediate reward, or two small rewards if they waited for a period of time." In contrast, reading unfamiliar articles to _maybe_ get a "reward" is a Bayesian Probability. As the one reads each sentence that's not engaging, the expectation that there might be a "reward" at the end is tainted by the fact that most long articles in the past that reader forced themselves to finish didn't present a worthwhile reward at the end. Now, if JumpCrisscross explicitly told the reader that there would be a guaranteed mind-blowing insight payoff at the end of the long article before the reader started it, then the test of that patience would be closer to The Marshmallow test.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    It’s not a random article. It’s been upvoted to the HN front page. > if JumpCrisscross explicitly told the reader that there would be a guaranteed mind-blowing insight payoff at the end I literally said it’s “a rewarding read.”
    - logifail 2y ago
      > It’s not a random article. It’s been upvoted to the HN front page. Time is precious, and I choose not to waste mine on the unnecessarily slow consumption of annoyingly-formatted articles. I came across this hypothesis recently: "A lot of the magic of ChatGPT is nothing to do with AI, it’s just nice to consume high-quality internet content without ads or whacky custom formatting."[0] [0] https://x.com/maiab/status/1723784023619895489 https://x.com/maiab/status/1723784023619895489
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Time is precious, and I choose not to waste mine We’re both commenting on a thread about the value of time against about three seconds of scrolling. It’s safe to say nobody here, myself included, is particularly constrained in terms of time and energy.
- rjmill 2y ago
  This article is ADHD-walled. The long load time, the weird slide show. Then the first page has a jittery animation that makes it impossible for me to actually focus on reading the article. It's less of a marshmallow thing (though I often fail that test) and more of an overwhelming impression that the article does not want me to read it.
  - z_zetetic_z 2y ago
    Halfway down the downward scroll is subverted into a left -> right scroll. No - just, no.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > This article is ADHD-walled I mean yes, folks with untreated ADHD would fail a marshmallow test. Marshmallow test failure doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. It simply signifies impatience and trust issues.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- thefz 2y ago
  Rather the article failed him. I closed the page at "from banks to government to TikTok", of all the glorious applications of a world wide network, the most glaring is teenagers making dance videos.
- IncreasePosts 2y ago
  That's not failing the marshmallow test, because the reward is obvious at the start of the test. Is the reward obvious for reading any random article? No, but it may be there. But I sincerely doubt that you, or anyone, devotes themselves to consuming 100% of the content they come across on the internet, in hopes for a payoff(which may never come) in the end.
98codes 2y ago
This article definitely wins my award for the most unnecessary scrolljacking -- the animations add no value, are too short, and only serve to delay being to read further in the article.

I stopped after the first 3 slides, since the information density is too low and the animation too slow.

by ctenb 2y ago

I stopped after the first 3 slides, since the information density is too low and the animation too slow.

> the information density is too low You failed the marshmallow test [1]. There is a traditional, long-form article that presents a rewarding read. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experiment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experim...

generalizations 2y ago
Marshmallow test assumes the payoff exists and is worth it. Does it? Is it? IDK and I don't want to waste time finding out. I'm far more interested in information-dense sources that let me find out if I want to know what it's offering. That's why journal articles have abstracts.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Does it? Is it? IDK and I don't want to waste time finding out This is what goes through the toddlers’ heads too! Gauging credibility is inextricably entangled with patience and Kahmeman’s System 2 thinking [1][2]. If this were a random article, sure, you shouldn’t trust. But it’s not. It’s on HN’s front page. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/ [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
  - 01HNNWZ0MV43FF 2y ago
    The Internet is full of non-marshmallows though, I'm not gonna wait around forever for a haribo
  - generalizations 2y ago
    Given how many non-marshmallow articles are out there on the internet, and your apparent risk-reward ratio, I wonder if you're the one failing the test. And you haven't really justified your original claim that GP failed the marshmallow test.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > how many non-marshmallow articles are out there on the internet Most of the HN front page aren’t marshmallows. If you believe they are, it’s irrational to be here, let alone waste time commenting about it.
      - generalizations 2y ago
        The contents of the HN front page is determined by the HN readers, and is not uniformly interesting to all of them. It is up to the article presented to the users to prove that it is worth the time to read and deserves to be on the front page, and this one doesn't to a great job of that. The marshmallow test should have a follow up, where the person offering the marshmallow has to prove credibility, and the person receiving it has to decide if it's worth waiting. Would be an interesting view of human interactions.
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > marshmallow test should have a follow up, where the person offering the marshmallow has to prove credibility This thread is becoming a parody of itself. I linked to literally this study above [1][2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40076494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40076494 [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730121/
    - prepend 2y ago
      I think GP just wants you to be smart enough to commend them for knowing of the marshmallow test but not smart enough to know if the reference is applicable.
  - thefz 2y ago
    I agree with OP that this presentation is very irritating.
  - prepend 2y ago
    Toddlers are told they will get two marshmallows if they wait. This is like “you can have a headache now and, if you wait, might get something later, perhaps a punch in the face, perhaps a slice of pie, perhaps nothing.”
flybrand 2y ago
The kid can see the marshmallow. I can’t see the payoff from this article. The kid knows what the payoff is. The payoff here is unknown.
Kalium 2y ago
The article fails the marshmallow test - it needs to convince people that there is a traditional, long-form article that will be a rewarding read from the start. Only then is the test relevant to humans. Otherwise, all that's really being tested is the reader's trust in the publisher.
ajdude 2y ago
I really hate how articles are starting with full page slides and animations now. This is the third article that I've seen this week following the format. I suppose since two of those three were on the HN front page it's a format that works, but I guess I'm not the target audience.
- kwhitefoot 2y ago
  This one is different from most. The visual design is consistent, engaging, and well done. The pictures are relevant and interesting and complement the text. I agree that most articles that start with slides are just dross, this one is an exception.
jasode 2y ago
>You failed the marshmallow test [1]. There is a traditional, long-form article that presents a rewarding read. I didn't downvote but reading an unknown article with unknown or non-existent payoff is not the same premise as The Marshmallow Test because the Stanford experiment explicitly specifies the "reward" upfront: ">, a child was offered a choice between one small but immediate reward, or two small rewards if they waited for a period of time." In contrast, reading unfamiliar articles to _maybe_ get a "reward" is a Bayesian Probability. As the one reads each sentence that's not engaging, the expectation that there might be a "reward" at the end is tainted by the fact that most long articles in the past that reader forced themselves to finish didn't present a worthwhile reward at the end. Now, if JumpCrisscross explicitly told the reader that there would be a guaranteed mind-blowing insight payoff at the end of the long article before the reader started it, then the test of that patience would be closer to The Marshmallow test.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  It’s not a random article. It’s been upvoted to the HN front page. > if JumpCrisscross explicitly told the reader that there would be a guaranteed mind-blowing insight payoff at the end I literally said it’s “a rewarding read.”
  - logifail 2y ago
    > It’s not a random article. It’s been upvoted to the HN front page. Time is precious, and I choose not to waste mine on the unnecessarily slow consumption of annoyingly-formatted articles. I came across this hypothesis recently: "A lot of the magic of ChatGPT is nothing to do with AI, it’s just nice to consume high-quality internet content without ads or whacky custom formatting."[0] [0] https://x.com/maiab/status/1723784023619895489 https://x.com/maiab/status/1723784023619895489
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Time is precious, and I choose not to waste mine We’re both commenting on a thread about the value of time against about three seconds of scrolling. It’s safe to say nobody here, myself included, is particularly constrained in terms of time and energy.
rjmill 2y ago
This article is ADHD-walled. The long load time, the weird slide show. Then the first page has a jittery animation that makes it impossible for me to actually focus on reading the article. It's less of a marshmallow thing (though I often fail that test) and more of an overwhelming impression that the article does not want me to read it.
- z_zetetic_z 2y ago
  Halfway down the downward scroll is subverted into a left -> right scroll. No - just, no.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > This article is ADHD-walled I mean yes, folks with untreated ADHD would fail a marshmallow test. Marshmallow test failure doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. It simply signifies impatience and trust issues.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
thefz 2y ago
Rather the article failed him. I closed the page at "from banks to government to TikTok", of all the glorious applications of a world wide network, the most glaring is teenagers making dance videos.
IncreasePosts 2y ago
That's not failing the marshmallow test, because the reward is obvious at the start of the test. Is the reward obvious for reading any random article? No, but it may be there. But I sincerely doubt that you, or anyone, devotes themselves to consuming 100% of the content they come across on the internet, in hopes for a payoff(which may never come) in the end.

98codes 2y ago

This article definitely wins my award for the most unnecessary scrolljacking -- the animations add no value, are too short, and only serve to delay being to read further in the article.