Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 47 posts

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#21

Post by anigbrowl »

realbarack wrote: post #10
techntoke wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've been lame every since implementing article limits. It's the freaking news. Who wants to pay to read the news, especially when the articles are shared all over the web?

I pay to read the news because I prefer to get information from high-quality organizations that I trust to hire skilled, relatively objective journalists who will work hard to accurately report a story. So much of unpaid journalism is bloggers re-hashing the work of these big(ger)-budget news agencies, often with less clarity and more partisan slant. Not to say NYT, WaPo, WSJ and other high-quality paid sources are p…

All true but most people don't want all their news from one outlet any more.

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#22

Post by jointpdf »

taneq wrote: post #13
rubidium wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“infrastructure isn't as well in place to deal with things like this“ and people don’t know how to either. It’s similar to blizzards in Georgia. Minnesota is fine with 6” snow. In Georgia it’s lots more risk because of the lack of experience. It’s bad because people (usually already frail) get heatstroke/overheated and die.

> people (usually already frail) This always makes these sort of dire predictions sound exaggerated to me. There’s always a population of (usually older) people who are nearing the end and we seem irrationally unwilling to accept “old age” as a cause of death. Any slight disturbance is then blamed and we get dramatic headlines about “hundreds die in 35C heatwave.”

Infants and toddlers are also frail, and regularly die from heatstroke. The probability of this happening increases as temperatures rise.

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#25

Post by justAnotherNET »

18pfsmt wrote: post #23
jaytaylor wrote: post #3

Now NYT disables reading from incognito. Lame. http://archive.is/cF01U

This is an off-topic comment that is distracting from the topic-at-hand. For a "hacker," one just disables scripts from running from that domain.

Mods please remove this comment as off topic

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#26

Post by mschuster91 »

jaytaylor wrote: post #3

Now NYT disables reading from incognito. Lame. http://archive.is/cF01U

How do these work anyway? Guess they're running some feature checks as the (probably aged to hell) webview in the HN or reddit app I use always hits that wall.

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#27

Post by tomohawk »

We see a lot more weather hype in the news than we used to. Winter storms have names. We get "arctic vortexes". And normal summer temps are flogged as a massive heat wave.

Someone in the biz was telling me that the reason is that many 'news' orgs would rather have an article about the weather than about a lot of other subjects, so they've steadily increased the number of weather related coverage.

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#29

Post by techntoke »

danso wrote: post #20
techntoke wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've been lame every since implementing article limits. It's the freaking news. Who wants to pay to read the news, especially when the articles are shared all over the web?

Because it costs money to pay the professionals who report and write the articles?

I thought that they got most of that money from the companies and influencers paying them to write stories and passing it as news?

Re: Heat Wave to Hit Two-Thirds of the U.S. Here’s What to Expect

#30

Post by realbarack »

staticautomatic wrote: post #18
realbarack wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay to read the news because I prefer to get information from high-quality organizations that I trust to hire skilled, relatively objective journalists who will work hard to accurately report a story. So much of unpaid journalism is bloggers re-hashing the work of these big(ger)-budget news agencies, often with less clarity and more partisan slant. Not to say NYT, WaPo, WSJ and other high-quality paid sources are p…

The NY Times doesn't exactly have a consistent record of skilled, relatively objective reporting.

Are there specific instances you have in mind? I actually think they do pretty good job on the whole.
Post reply on HN