To add onto that, for a discussion board that prides itself on being more intellectually minded, there's a disappointing number of clickbaity/misleading headlines posted here on any given day.

Well, it's good I didn't imply that, then. People can miss things in articles, ignore them, or just not understand. All are valid reasons for missing/ignoring that part. My point is that the article doesn't mention it was easier to breastfeed back in the day, despite that being a kind of obvious point to make. So it's possible that they couldn't make the point because we don't know if breastfeeding was difficult back then.

Technically, the rule is against accusing an individual of not reading the article. It's widely known that most of us smash reply before reading the third word of the headline -- that's why the site automatically strips words like "why" and "how" from titles; it really improves the chances that comments will be at least topical.

Note, snark like the above is explicitly forbidden.

Most HN comments sections are like this, where the title is more a nucleation site for a discussion than commenting on the actual article.

On a work computer. Can't always access the articles.

Plus I'm looking to see if it is worth the risk -- a lot of articles are clickbate.

We don't talk about that here, you know this.