[flagged]
"He Lost It at the Movies" means nothing to me, and even after I knew what the article was about still means nothing to be, it's no more than click bait. The summary on the other hand, gives you enough context to know what the writer was even trying to write about.
Yes. That's why I'm on substack. Good writing can be a pleasure to read even if it's about something I don't care all that much about. A summary can tell you about the subject matter, but fails to capture the quality of the writing itself.
To put it another way: I'd rather read an idlewords post about taking a Russian boat to the Antarctic[1] - something I care little about as a subject - than read AI generated slop about some Python programming subject that's immediately relevant to my career.
also taking: "suggesting that writing as whole has no more value than a random list of words" from me just saying it'd be nice to know what I was reading before I spent the time reading it seems kind of melodramatic.