I apologize that you found my text length was too long but I thought the extra background was necessary to state why deep reading is often a waste of time.

If I only state a 1 sentence punchline in my original post, it can seem like a cheap hit-and-run comment and therefore not really engaging with the article's arguments. (Or the extreme brevity would just invite snark such as "you probably don't have deep reading skill". Therefore, a writer's reflex is to defensively preempt that with extra words that try to establish street cred.)

I thought it would be interesting to share that many of us can do "deep reading" and yet we don't bother with the effort -- and that behavior is not a contradiction. Instead, it's an optimization of limited reading time. This tradeoff doesn't seem to be reflected in Maryanne Wolf's research.

>She didn’t mention that you can check other shorter sources before you commit to reading,

I actually did and I specifically used "HN comments" as an example of readers trying to find a tldr summary and why it's a rational strategy.