(www.scientificamerican.com)

757 points headalgorithm | 1 comments | 2/5/2025, 2:55:00 PM | HN request time: 0.201s | source

Show context

munchler ◴[2/5/2025, 6:47:00 PM] No.42953233[source]▶

Scientific American used to be a great magazine and should get back to what made it so valuable: Covering important ideas in science without watering them down. Their website now describes it as "the essential guide to the most awe-inspiring advances in science and technology". Blech.

replies(1): >>42956222 #

fritzo ◴[2/5/2025, 10:27:00 PM] No.42956222[source]▶

>>42953233 #

Have you tried Science News? I currently read neither, but at one point I switched from the fluffy Scientific American to the no-nonsense Science News.

replies(1): >>42956426 #

1. munchler ◴[2/5/2025, 10:44:00 PM] No.42956426[source]▶

>>42956222 #

Thank you for the suggestion. I will give it a try.

↑

Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed