The amount of images in circulation affects our ability to understand them | Hacker News Reader

The amount of images in circulation affects our ability to understand them

reallifemag.com

27 pointsprismatic6 comments

It used to be that something with pretensions of brainyness like this article would be reviewed by at least one editor before publication, so they could catch the glaring grammatical error in the title.

Everyone can argue as much as they want that "if you understand what they meant it doesn't matter", and maybe they're right, but I still miss the pride in craftsmanship that writing "correctly" implied.

Non-native English speaker here. What exactly is the grammatical error in: "The amount of images in circulation affects our ability to appreciate and understand them"?

It should have read, "The number of images...".

Take a look here: http://www.dailywritingtips.com/amount-vs-number/

It was the first thing that leaped out at me too, and truthfully if it had been followed with a stellar article it would have been merely annoying. Instead we were treated to exactly what you're expect from someone who can't edit a headline.

As an article, it's just a massive clot of claims presented without art or style, and certainly nothing like good evidence. It's intellectually, substantially, and systematically lazy.

Great read, thanks!

"Before the Revolution, an audience was a made up of individuals who simply consumed what was projected; after the Revolution the audience became a collective, with an important role in completing what was projected"

This is hard a little much.

Please, pray tell, what would the Cuban's watch if they could actually chose what they wanted to watch, instead of being told what to watch, and how to watch it?

I understand the argument about scarcity and appreciation, and that is fair.

But: "Cuba has one of the last intact coral reefs and environmentalists are rushing to protect it; preservationists are holding conferences to discuss strategies for preserving Cuba’s material culture."

So the socialists colonialists now want to keep Cubans oppressed, in their 'natural state of oppression', like fish in a bowl? For the aesthetic benefit of who?

Has anyone asked the Cubans what they prefer? I mean - if they do enjoy their state of scarcity, would they not remain so 'image frugal'.

This entire piece reeks of the ostensible benevolent totalitarianism of these kinds of systems. Very scary stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com