except those were laid out by hand with intent, whereas this one just kind of dumps all stories on a masonry board and calls it a day. This is likely why reading a (good) newspaper feels effortless, whereas reading this "forces you to read slowly".
I'd say that that's a feature of modern-ish newspapers with "advanced" layouting techniques from early to mid 20th century.
A news sheet from THE olden days (eg Victorian era), looks more like a wall of text, set as tightly -- an uniformly -- as possibly, which is not surprising considering the limitations imposed by the technology of the day.
As for story selection, I think the collective hivemind of hn-ers would be a worthy substitute for an editor in chief.
Comments
except those were laid out by hand with intent, whereas this one just kind of dumps all stories on a masonry board and calls it a day. This is likely why reading a (good) newspaper feels effortless, whereas reading this "forces you to read slowly".
I'd say that that's a feature of modern-ish newspapers with "advanced" layouting techniques from early to mid 20th century.
A news sheet from THE olden days (eg Victorian era), looks more like a wall of text, set as tightly -- an uniformly -- as possibly, which is not surprising considering the limitations imposed by the technology of the day.
As for story selection, I think the collective hivemind of hn-ers would be a worthy substitute for an editor in chief.