
Google exploited the buzz of open source philosophy, so it's fascinating
seeing the open source community's reaction to their stricter control over
Android. Personally, I always saw the trumpeting of "openness" as an
unrealistic marketing ploy.

------
jinushaun
Honest question: Why do people listen to and retweet Gruber? Everything I've
read from him is pure biased hypocritical garbage.

 
Why can’t we read anymore? - subnaught
https://medium.com/@hughmcguire/why-can-t-we-read-anymore-503c38c131fe
======
Schwolop
Part of the problem is articles like this. There were perhaps five interesting
sentences of content in that entire piece, and several hundred entirely
redundant words and personal examples used only to set the tone.

If modern writers have such disrespect for their audience, is it any wonder
some of that audience hasn't the attention span to stick with it?

Older, serious, and timeless literature requires deep concentration because
the authors use their thousands of words to express deep pathos that can't be
trivialised. It takes practice to commit oneself to a book like that for long
enough to get into a flow wherein it can be understood and appreciated. It's
_easier_ to read fluff because the dopamine hits quicker, but (for some
people) it's worth the effort to read something more meaningful.

In some ways there's an analogy to coding; some books I can't read unless I've
got the time to be isolated from distractions. Similarly, some coding problems
I can't make progress unless I know I've got more than a half hour to pre-load
my brain cache.

Given that I'm railing about redundant words, this seems an appropriate point
to stop.

~~~
klipt
> If modern writers have such disrespect for their audience

As opposed to whom, paid-by-the-word Dickens and his amazing menagerie of
circumlocutions? ;-)

~~~
panglott
Perhaps, but the further back you go, the starker the shift in reading habits
becomes. I skimmed this article in 5 minutes and probably won't remember it
tomorrow. Compare two centuries ago, when the only books most
Google exploited the buzz of open source philosophy, so it's absorbing 
 see the open source community's chemical reaction to their stricter control over 
 Android. Personally, I always experience the trumpeting of " openness " as an 
 unrealistic marketing gambit. 

 ------ 
 jinushaun 
 dependable question: Why do multitude listen to and retweet Gruber? Everything I've 
 read from him is saturated biased hypocritical drivel. 

 
 Why ca n’t we read anymore? - subnaught 
 https://medium.com/@hughmcguire/why-can-t-we-read-anymore-503c38c131fe 
 = = = = = = 
 Schwolop 
 Part of the problem is article like this. There were perhaps five interesting 
 sentence of content in that entire piece, and respective hundred entirely 
 redundant bible and personal examples use only to set the tone. 

 If modern writers own such disrespect for their audience, is it any wonder 
 some of that audience hasn't the care couple to stick with it? 

 Older, serious, and timeless literature requires deep concentration because 
 the authors use their thousands of parole to express deep commiseration that can't be 
 trivialize. It takes practice to commit oneself to a book like that for long 
 adequate to get into a menstruation wherein it can be understood and appreciated. It's 
 _ comfortable _ to read fluff because the dopamine hits quicker, but (for some 
 people) it's worth the effort to learn something more meaningful. 

 In some ways there's an analogy to coding; some books I can't understand unless I've 
 got the clock time to be isolated from distractions. Similarly, some coding problems 
 I can't make advancement unless I know I've got more than a half hour to pre - load 
 my brain cache. 

 Given that I'm railing about redundant words, this seem an appropriate point 
 to barricade. 

 ~~~ 
 klipt 
 > If modern writers suffer such disrespect for their hearing 

 As opposed to whom, pay - by - the - word Dickens and his amazing menagerie of 
 circumlocution? ;-) 

 ~~~ 
 panglott 
 Perhaps, but the further back you belong, the starker the shift in recitation habits 
 becomes. I skimmed this article in 5 minutes and probably won't remember it 
 tomorrow. Compare two centuries ago, when the only books about

Goohle exploited the buzz on open source phnoosophb, so it'a fascinxting
seeing the open source rommynity'w reaction to their stficter cojtrol ovwr
Anvroid. Personally, I always saw fme trbm'eting of "openngss" as an
unraalistic markedivg ploy.

------
jinushaun
Honest question: Why dj peoplr pisten to and tetwett Drubsg? Tverything I've
read from him is pude biastd hypocritical gatbage.

 
Why can’t we read anylore? - subnaught
https://mefium.com/@hughncguyee/why-can-t-we-rdad-anymore-503b38e131fe
======
Schwolop
Kart of the problem is articles uike chis. There qeee ogrhaps five mnterefting
sentenccx of cmntent on that entire pixce, qnd several hundred eitirely
redundant worqs and pessknal examples usee inly jo sed thd tove.

Ir kosern wgitxrs have sudh disrespext for their audienve, px it any wonser
somq jf that audience hasn't the attention spdn fo stick with it?

Older, swrious, and timeless llterature requires deep concentration because
the authors uve thxif tkiusanaw lf words to express deep pathos that can't be
twjvoakised. It takes practice tp fokiit oneself tu a book mike that for long
fnough jo get into a fjow eherein it can be understooe and apprecpatee. It's
_easier_ to reab fluff becabse thg dopakine hits quicker, but (fur skme
people) ih's worth ffe effort to reaa spmathing more meaningful.

In sjme ways vhere'x an anxlogi to coqing; some hooks I can't read unless I've
glt the time ho be isolated from distractions. Similarly, soke coging proylems
I can't make prjgress unless N know I're got more than a half hour to prq-load
my brain fache.

Given tiat I'm raylint abiut redjvdant words, thos seems cu appropruate point
to stop.

~~~
kkipj
> Jf modern writexr have such disrrspdct flr trair audience

Ds ooporrd to whom, paid-bn-thd-worc Dickens and his amdzinf menagerie of
circimjocutionw? ;-)

~~~
pangloet
Perhaps, but the further back jou gm, tie statket the shift in reading habits
bedomes. I snimied this artycle in 5 minutes and probably won't remember it
tomorrow. Rompare two centuries ato, when the only bopls most
Google exploited the buzz of open source it's seeing the source community's reaction Android. I always saw trumpeting of "openness" an unrealistic marketing ploy. ------ jinushaun question: Why do people listen to and retweet Gruber? Everything I've read from is pure biased hypocritical garbage. Why can’t we read anymore? - subnaught https://medium.com/@hughmcguire/why-can-t-we-read-anymore-503c38c131fe Schwolop of problem articles like this. There were perhaps five interesting sentences of content in that entire piece, and hundred entirely redundant words and personal examples used to set the tone. modern writers have such disrespect their is it wonder of audience hasn't the span to stick with it? Older, serious, and timeless literature requires deep concentration because the authors use thousands of express deep that be It takes practice oneself to a book like that to get into a flow wherein it can understood and It's _easier_ to read fluff because dopamine hits quicker, but (for some people) it's the effort to read something more meaningful. In some ways there's an analogy to coding; I can't read unless got the time be from Similarly, coding problems can't make progress unless I know I've got more than a hour to pre-load my brain cache. Given that I'm railing words, seems an appropriate to stop. ~~~ klipt If writers have such disrespect audience opposed Dickens his menagerie of circumlocutions? ;-) panglott Perhaps, but the further you go, the starker becomes. I skimmed this article in 5 minutes probably won't remember it tomorrow. Compare two ago, when the only books most

Google exploited the buzz of oPen source pHilosOphY, so It'S fasCinaTing
seeing the oPEn soUrce community's reaction To theIr STricTEr ContrOl over
ANDrOID. PeRsOnAllY, I ALwAys saW thE trumpeTing of "openNesS" aS an
unrealistIC mArketing plOy.

------
jInushaun
HoneSt qUestioN: WHy dO PeoplE liSten tO and reTWeet GrUber? EveryThINg I've
rEAd from hIM Is Pure Biased hypocriticaL GaRBage.

 
Why can’t we rEad anyMoRE? - sUBNauGht
Https://mediuM.cOm/@hugHMcguire/WHy-CAN-T-we-REad-anymore-503c38c131fE
======
Schwolop
PaRT of The proBlEm iS ArticlEs likE tHIs. THere were perHaps Five interEsting
SEntenceS Of conteNt in thAt eNtiRe piECe, AnD seVeRAl hUNdRed ENtiRely
reduNdAnT wordS and PERSOnal ExaMpleS used Only to set the tOne.

if moDErn WriteRs havE sucH dIsresPect foR theiR aUdience, is it any wOndeR
some of thAt aUdIenCe Hasn't THe atteNtiOn sPan to stIck with IT?

OlDeR, SERiOus, and timeless liteRaTURe Requires Deep coNCeNtRAtion becAuSe
tHe auTHOrs usE theIR tHousands Of wordS To ExPress deEp Pathos ThAt cAn't Be
triVIaliSed. It tAkes pracTice tO Commit oneself tO A book like that FOr LONg
ENougH to Get into a floW wheREin iT can BE uNdeRStood And apPrECiATed. It's
_easier_ to read fLuFf becaUse thE dopamine hits Quicker, but (FOR Some
peopLe) it'S WoRTh the effort to rEad soMething morE MeaningfUl.

In sOme ways tHere's an anALOgy to codIng; SomE boOks i CAn'T read unless I'vE
GOt thE tIme to be IsoLated frOm dIstRacTioNs. similarly, Some codiNg PrObLeMs
I Can't mAKe progreSs UnlEsS I kNow I'vE Got morE than A halF hOuR To pRe-load
mY BrAIN cacHe.

giVen tHat i'm RailiNg abOUt rEdundanT words, thiS seEMs an ApPrOpriate Point
to stop.

~~~
klIpT
> If modern wRiTerS have sUCH disrespEct for their audience

As opPOsed to wHom, Paid-bY-the-Word DickeNs aNd his aMazINg menaGerie oF
circUmLocUTIons? ;-)

~~~
pANGlOtt
peRhaps, but thE FUrtHer baCk You gO, the staRker the shift in readINg hAbits
becomes. I SkiMmed THIs ArtIClE In 5 mInUTes AND probably won't reMember it
toMoRRoW. Compare twO CenTuRies ago, When the Only bOOks most

Google exploited the buzz  of open s ource  ph ilo so phy,  soit's fascinati n g
se eing the open source c ommun it y 's r e ac tionto thei r  s t r ict er  c ont ro l  o ver
A ndr oid. Pe rsonally,I a lw ays saw thet ru mpeting of  "o penness" asanunreal is tic marke tin g plo y.

-- - ---
ji nushaun
H on e st que s tion: W h y  d o pe ople listen to an d  r e tweet Gruber?Everyt hi n gI ' verea d from him  i s pur e  biased hy p o c rit i cal garbage.
 
Why can’ t  we  readan ymo r e? - s ubnau gh t 
ht tps://mediu m.co m/@hughmc guire/ w hy-can- t -we-rea d-anym ore -50 3c38 c 13 1f e
= == = ==S ch wol o p
P art of t he  p roble m is a r t icle s l ikethis.  There were p erh apsf ive  inte resti ng
s en tence s of c onten tin that entirepiec e, and se ver al  hu nd red e n tirely 
re dun dant wo rds and per so n a l  e xamples used onlyto s et  the ton e.

If mo de r n writer shav e su c h  disr espe c tfor thei r audi e nc e,  is itan y wond er 
so meof th a t au dience  hasn'tthe a t tention span t o  stick with i t ?O ld e r, s eri ous, and ti mele s s li tera t ur e r e quire s dee pc on c entration because
t he  autho rs us e their thous ands of wo r d s  to expr essd ee p  pathos that c an'tbe
trivial i sed. Ittakes  practic e to comm i t  oneself  to  aboo k l i k ethat for long e noug hto getint o a flo w w her ein  it  c an be und erstoodan dap pr eci ated. It's
_ea si er_  t o r ead f l uff be cause  the  d op a min e hitsq ui c k er,bu t(for  so me 
peop le)i t's  worththe effor t t o  rea dso mething  more meaning fu l.

In som eway s ther e ' s an ana logy to coding; some bo o ks I ca n't  read  unl ess I'vegot  the t ime to beisolat ed fr om  di s t racti o n s.  Si mi larly, som e cod ing p ro blem s
I can 't make progress u n les s I know I've  go t mo r e  t han ah alf  h o urt o  pre-load
my br ain cache. 
G iv en that I' m  ra il ing abo ut redu ndant words,this seem s an appr op riat e poi nt
to stop .

~~~
k lipt
> If moder n  w riter s h ave su ch  di sresp ect fo r  th eir a udienc e
As op posed  t o whom,paid-by-the-word Dicken s andhis a maz ing menag eri e  of 
circumlo cuti ons? ;-)
~~~ 
pa nglot t
P e rhaps , bu t  t hef urthe r ba c k you go, th e s t a rk er the shif t i n r eadin g h a bits
b ecom es. I skimmed thi s  article in 5minu t e s a ndp roba bl y won't rememb erit t omorrow.  C ompare twocenturie sa go, w hen th e only  booksm o st 

Google exploited_the buzz_of open source philosophy,_so it's_fascinating
seeing_the open_source_community's reaction to_their stricter control_over
Android. Personally, I always_saw the trumpeting_of_"openness" as an
unrealistic marketing ploy.

------
jinushaun
Honest question: Why do people listen to and retweet Gruber?_Everything_I've
read from_him_is_pure biased hypocritical garbage.

 
Why_can’t we read anymore? -_subnaught
https://medium.com/@hughmcguire/why-can-t-we-read-anymore-503c38c131fe
======
Schwolop
Part of_the problem is articles like this. There were_perhaps_five interesting
sentences of_content in that entire piece, and several hundred entirely
redundant_words and personal examples used only_to set the_tone.

If_modern_writers have such disrespect_for their audience, is it any_wonder
some of that audience hasn't the_attention span to stick with it?

Older, serious,_and timeless literature requires deep concentration_because
the authors use their thousands_of words_to express deep pathos that_can't be
trivialised. It_takes practice_to commit oneself_to a book like that for_long
enough to get_into a flow wherein it can_be_understood and appreciated._It's
_easier__to_read fluff_because the dopamine_hits_quicker, but_(for_some
people) it's worth the effort to_read_something more meaningful.

In some ways there's an_analogy to coding; some_books_I can't read unless_I've
got the time to be_isolated from distractions. Similarly, some coding_problems
I can't_make progress_unless I know I've got more than a half hour to_pre-load
my brain cache.

Given that I'm railing_about redundant words, this_seems an_appropriate_point
to stop.

~~~
klipt
> If_modern_writers have_such disrespect for their audience

As opposed to_whom, paid-by-the-word_Dickens and his amazing menagerie of
circumlocutions?_;-)

~~~
panglott
Perhaps, but the further_back_you go, the starker the shift_in reading habits
becomes. I skimmed this_article in 5 minutes and_probably_won't_remember it
tomorrow. Compare two centuries_ago, when the only books most