[theoh]

OK. Downvotes happily accepted; but I think we all operate in "peephole" mode now; the cost of tracing sources back to the original is significant.

There is no karma to be had from complaining about HN's software, and yet it is so very inadequate.

[dragonwriter]

That it was a quote from the article seemed clear in the post in which the quote was presented, so while I agree that it can be difficult to clearly present quotes in some situations on HN and a good blockquote formatting facility would be preferable, I don't think that's really a problem here.

[theoh]

As I read the comments on this post, the top reply contains multiple mathematical symbols which aren't rendering on my recent Android phone. You can't pretend that HN has a huge proactive team working on these issues.

I'm loathe to infer that you think that the problem is "me" because I think the underlying question is whether the comments should be a friendly place for people who do not have time or inclination to read the article. You may see that as an appalling, lazy, degeneration in discourse; the reality is that reading the comments without wading through a blog post is a valid tactic. If clearer methods of quoting were available the two or three of us involved here would have wasted less time.

The "engineer-forward" alternative in which everyone strives to speak from a totalizing position of authority is just, frankly (as a technical person myself) unattainable.

[theoh]

Just to be clear, I am literally saying that IMHO it should be OK to converse in the comments without reading the link in question. If HN can't accommodate this, it's not a friendly platform for humans.