[maxheadroom]

To save you the read, the summation is in the second-to-last paragraph:

>As you have probably noticed, I didn’t say anything about information. That’s because really the reference to information in “black hole information loss” is entirely unnecessary and just causes confusion. The problem of black hole “information loss” really has nothing to do with just exactly what you mean by information. It’s just a term that loosely speaking says you can’t tell from the final state what was the exact initial state.

[JDEW]

I think the article is already quite concise. Moreover it is nicely written and explains a current open problem in physics from first principles.

A summary like this is useful if the underlying article is bloated and clickbait-y but in this case potentially detracts a reader from a good article.

As featured on the front page a few days ago [1]: knowledge without understanding is meaningless.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/24/dougla...

[CathedralBorrow]

For what it's worth, I think the summary is useful.

[jinushaun]

It’s the opposite of well written and concise! The writing style is very much like someone talking, full of sentences that are too long or too short.

[raphaelj]

That's because it's a direct transcript of the Youtube video above.