I very much enjoy that type of style of pop-up. It's quick and feels more like adding an optional paragraph versus opening a never-ending portal every 5 seconds. Your link css is also not as jarring as a bright color on a white background compared to regular black text
Wikipedia also has Short descriptions which I personally find to be extremely useful—maybe we could implement something similar here for highly linked-to posts?
As the guy who originally wrote the "maybe we should have fewer hyperlinks or be careful with them?" post... for the record I have changed my views on this.
While I think there is a cost of LW having lots of hyperlinks... I also think it's just overall better to have people plunge through the rabbithole and get caught up on all the important site concepts.
(I think it's good to have a read-only-without-tabsplosion option, but I mostly think the going through a tabsplosion phase is helpful for people actually being able to contribute to LW state-of-the-art discussion for rationality and alignment)
So this was a phase? You went through it, wrote the article and then came out the other side?
From where I am right now it feels never-ending but I suppose if I can read so much that it stops being so provably distracting, that's a nice upside.
Yeah. It's maybe an unfortunate fact that the amount of stuff grows over time, but you will definitely hit a point where you've made it through the backlog.
the less readable your posts become because the brain must make a decision with each link whether to click it for more information or keep reading. After several of these links, your brain starts to take on more cognitive load
I don't think it's reasonable to try to avoid the cognitive load of deciding whether to investigate subclaims or follow up on interesting ledes while reading. I think it's a crucial impulse for critical thinking and research and we have to have it well in hand.
This post is a call to action to join in an experiment, in which you try to use LessWrong for a week without seeing the massive amounts of hyperlinks authors tend to use.
Ironically linked here is a post by Tom Johnson citing The Shallows that delves into why hyperlinks could be bad for focus.
A TL;DR quote from that is
This seems to be a default behavior on aggregator sites like reddit, LessWrong, and TvTropes.
Here is a post about why LessWrong is particularly prone to going down this rabbithole for new users.
Here's two TL;DR quotes:
That post by Raemon also clearly called for a solution, which I don't believe Raemon found.
So here is an experiment and possibly the solution.
Download a custom CSS editor, for Chrome you can use Stylish.
For LessWrong add this as a custom CSS style:
This is the minimum viable custom CSS. It makes it so there's no special color associated with links and it makes it so when you hover over a link it doesn't change color (really it's the opacity that changes on LessWrong specifically, so future LessWrong designs might require different CSS).
It doesn't stop your cursor from changing to a pointer when you hover over a link, so you can still see that it's a clickable link if you look closely. I find this to be the right amount of link usefulness, but you could also disable that hover-activity too if you wish.
There are more intrusive ways such as Reader-Mode extensions to disable links, but this changes as little as possible while still helping your brain avoid the overload.
Try it out for a week and report your findings below!