So we have one story on HN about how shipping containers created more commerce than all the free trade treaties combined. Another story, about the use of the S

So we have one story on HN about how shipping containers created more commerce than all the free trade treaties combined. Another story, about the use of the Special 301 provisions, is a wall of text written by a law professor, about the U.S. relationship with one country, full of nuance, complexity, and consultant weasel words. Wish I had something more to say about the import of these stories, but as a news consumer and voter I can certainly observe that one story is much easier to understand, digest, and put to immediate use than the other. I understand that capitalism's relentless drive to make transactions more efficient have done more than complex governmental structures. Might not agree with it, but I understand it. The author reached me with his message. The other story? Not so much. Perhaps a better hook might have worked. Something to draw me in. I'm left both not understanding the story (except in general terms) and not knowing why it might be important. I can't spend 30 minutes digesting the special circumstances of Ukranian trade. Not without something more than this. If you need any more proof of the problem here, just take a look at the comment thread.