3 ms·

The sentiment highlighted in various comments on this post isn't that the blog piece is 'too long'. The sentiment is that it is incoherent, illegible and border

by johnfn 1y ago

The sentiment highlighted in various comments on this post isn't that the blog piece is 'too long'. The sentiment is that it is incoherent, illegible and borderline unhinged. It clashes so strongly with what I consider to be calm, reasonable writing that I can't justify continuing to spend my time reading it.

stego-tech 1y ago
> It clashes so strongly with what I consider to be calm, reasonable writing that I can't justify continuing to spend my time reading it. Which makes the author’s point for them. It wasn’t calm, reasonable writing at all, and it’s your mistake to assume all writing must be calm and reasonable in order for it to be valid or of import. It was written with passion, zeal, distress, and rage. It was shaking the reader and demanding an answer: do they not see what the author does? Do they not connect the puzzle pieces in the same way? Is the reader not seeing the same visage as the author? That’s the entire point of its length, its tone, its language. It was meant to appeal to humans, not machines, and to be an exasperated plea for others to either acknowledge what the author sees and act upon it, or to rebuke the author’s viewpoint with supporting evidence. Instead, the response is a bunch of “too long and emotions are bad” whinging. It neither refutes the author nor critiques the piece as written, simply vapidly complains the message wasn’t delivered in a way they personally preferred. Which, if I were to extrapolate, is its own damning indictment of a technology industry so focused on designing around niche edge cases and shareholder demands that it neglects fundamentals. If that also holds true, then it’s of no wonder LLM summaries are so celebrated: Content without context, in as dry and inoffensive a format as possible. Never a threat to someone’s thinking, never a challenge to their positions, never complex enough to warrant consideration.
- devmor 1y ago
  Well said. Detractors specifically whinging about the tone and appeal of the piece are exactly who the piece is criticizing. They want to be catered to. To have their hype built up. Negatives must not be allowed in their worldview, and if reality has negatives then to hell with reality. It’s bleak, as the author so eloquently describes.
  - johnfn 1y ago
    You really are saying, on Hacker News, that "negatives must not be allowed?" Hacker News, probably the most negative news site on the Internet, the place that hates everything, the place where the Dropbox 'Show HN' post got dismissive comments about how it could be done trivially? That's the place you're saying that negatives can't be allowed? You think that's more likely than that this is just a bad article?
- johnfn 1y ago
  Style matters. If you submit a manuscript full of typographical errors, no one is ever going to publish your novel, no matter how ground-breaking it might be. If you write a mathematical paper but scribble all your math notation in pencil rather than Latex, no one will ever read it. And if the only way that you can get your point across is through an incoherent rant, no one will take you seriously. There are plenty of comments here that go deeper than "too long and emotions are bad", see [1][2]. I find it fascinating that you don't seem to be able to either see or comprehend their critique, and instead reduce it to something far more infantile. When you say "The fact you’re crying over length", it is apparent to anyone that you are not trying to have a conversation, you're trying to score points - but your opponent isn't here to debate with you, because he doesn't exist. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44426139 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44426139 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44428303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44428303

by johnfn 1y ago

stego-tech 1y ago

> It clashes so strongly with what I consider to be calm, reasonable writing that I can't justify continuing to spend my time reading it. Which makes the author’s point for them. It wasn’t calm, reasonable writing at all, and it’s your mistake to assume all writing must be calm and reasonable in order for it to be valid or of import. It was written with passion, zeal, distress, and rage. It was shaking the reader and demanding an answer: do they not see what the author does? Do they not connect the puzzle pieces in the same way? Is the reader not seeing the same visage as the author? That’s the entire point of its length, its tone, its language. It was meant to appeal to humans, not machines, and to be an exasperated plea for others to either acknowledge what the author sees and act upon it, or to rebuke the author’s viewpoint with supporting evidence. Instead, the response is a bunch of “too long and emotions are bad” whinging. It neither refutes the author nor critiques the piece as written, simply vapidly complains the message wasn’t delivered in a way they personally preferred. Which, if I were to extrapolate, is its own damning indictment of a technology industry so focused on designing around niche edge cases and shareholder demands that it neglects fundamentals. If that also holds true, then it’s of no wonder LLM summaries are so celebrated: Content without context, in as dry and inoffensive a format as possible. Never a threat to someone’s thinking, never a challenge to their positions, never complex enough to warrant consideration.

devmor 1y ago
Well said. Detractors specifically whinging about the tone and appeal of the piece are exactly who the piece is criticizing. They want to be catered to. To have their hype built up. Negatives must not be allowed in their worldview, and if reality has negatives then to hell with reality. It’s bleak, as the author so eloquently describes.
- johnfn 1y ago
  You really are saying, on Hacker News, that "negatives must not be allowed?" Hacker News, probably the most negative news site on the Internet, the place that hates everything, the place where the Dropbox 'Show HN' post got dismissive comments about how it could be done trivially? That's the place you're saying that negatives can't be allowed? You think that's more likely than that this is just a bad article?
johnfn 1y ago
Style matters. If you submit a manuscript full of typographical errors, no one is ever going to publish your novel, no matter how ground-breaking it might be. If you write a mathematical paper but scribble all your math notation in pencil rather than Latex, no one will ever read it. And if the only way that you can get your point across is through an incoherent rant, no one will take you seriously. There are plenty of comments here that go deeper than "too long and emotions are bad", see [1][2]. I find it fascinating that you don't seem to be able to either see or comprehend their critique, and instead reduce it to something far more infantile. When you say "The fact you’re crying over length", it is apparent to anyone that you are not trying to have a conversation, you're trying to score points - but your opponent isn't here to debate with you, because he doesn't exist. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44426139 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44426139 [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44428303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44428303