readers

To divorce the content and the presentation is simply not feasible and pretty insulting to the good work of designers/typesetters and indeed readers.

This version has interesting annotations on the side from readers, but otherwise it is the same article.

If the readers don't like the popups, they can just say TC;DR and leave the site forever.

At the least, it should give the impression to readers of how overwhelming the job can be without best-in-class tools.

If every publisher stuck to simple, unobtrusive and relevant ads then readers wouldn't block them.

Screen readers and/or refreshable Braille display for the former, Dragon NaturallySpeaking for the latter.

I'm afraid RSS readers aren't very popular, however, and Google was indeed in a better place to change that.

I tried several RSS readers after Google Reader closed, and Inoreader is the one I've stuck with.

Just curious: What do you think would be of interest to HN readers?

I think you and I and the rest of the readers see that click-baity blog post for what it is.

There is a little bit of math ahead, which I only include because I think some readers will like it.

And they turned out to be right, we now have more and better RSS readers to choose from than ever before.

How can someone pretending to know what "should be of interest to HN readers" not know that: 1) HN readers, as a collective and as subgroups, have many and varied intellectual interests, including literature.

"Paper white" is what e-readers aim for.

My understanding of the complimentary copy marketplace is its informal, "here's this nice news release of ours, now you wouldn't want us to pull our ad budget, would you, so you know what to do." I'm not aware of any journalistic experiment where readers get to select between ads and complimentary copy.