[kordless]

The summary first style of writing is a hack to enable quick trust establishment. It doesn't work for all concepts and it's unlikely to be effective for communicating very complex and innovative subjects.

Also, some things just have to be shown visually to be trusted. A paragraph explaining an anti-gravity device isn't going to cut it. You need to show it working in person where there can be no doubt it's doing what you say it does.

[jperras]

> The summary first style of writing is a hack to enable quick trust establishment. It doesn't work for all concepts and it's unlikely to be effective for communicating very complex and innovative subjects.

This is literally the point of an abstract in any and every respected scientific journal I've ever read.

[ams6110]

And key to how to efficiently read journals: Read the abstract. If still interested, read the conclusion. If still interested, read the whole thing.

[tlb]

There is no subject so complex and innovative that you can't start with a summary explaining what the point is and why readers should care.

[AndrewKemendo]

It has nothing to do with "complex and innovative" it's the difference in perception inputs needed to grok something.

I can tell you very quickly about Virtual Reality and why you should care, but you won't understand it till you put a HMD on.