There are however a great deal of things people can do to make the same information available to a wider audience.
Formatting, fonts, colours, structure of argument, visual aids.
Clicking [reader view] on this article aided me immensely in being able to take it in. As one of the many ADHD people who encountered this, the white on black, wide page, and a serifed font were all non-informational aspects of the page that made it difficult to take in.
You are wrong that sometimes there is no tl;dr In the absence of someone putting in the work to make content accessible the emphasis merely falls upon the dr of tl;dr.
No-one requires you to make things for everyone, but you cannot expect to reach everyone without consideration of them either.
>You are wrong that sometimes there is no tl;dr In the absence of someone putting in the work to make content accessible the emphasis merely falls upon the dr of tl;dr.
On a technical level I agree.
>But how does one begin? It is not with grand declarations or bold, sweeping changes. That would miss the point entirely. Rather, it is with a gentle attention to the present, a deliberate shift in the way we move through the world.
That's a pretty good TLDR right there.
But on a cosmic level, I see nothing more ironic than asking for a TL;DR on how to take back your attention. Showing you have some interest in a topic but not enough to fully read it without shifting to yet another topic your brain runs you to. Thus failing the "gentle attention to the present".
I suppose design is subjective, but these were more to demonstrate that there are simple ways to make a website read good, instead of "looking good". I'd figure readers of Hacker news's web page design would sympathize.
These are no JS websites and I believe the first website is a total of 7 lines of CSS to help with margins. The second one's takeaway is to avoid pure whites and blacks (which from discussions is apparently a very controversial topic) and make a little use of typography
