Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article and then rush into the HN comments to get angry about it. That leads to generic tangents, which are predictable, tedious, and usually turn nasty. It's all so boring. We may need to add this to the site guidelines, although it's arguably covered by Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.
One way of looking at this is to take the following guideline to apply at the article level as well: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
The idea on HN is to have curious conversation. For that, a better practice would be to bring in the most interesting bit from an article, or the bit that creates more interesting responses in you. If an article creates no such responses in you, then the way to use HN in the intended spirit is to look at at different article instead.
One way of looking at this is to take the following guideline to apply at the article level as well: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
The idea on HN is to have curious conversation. For that, a better practice would be to bring in the most interesting bit from an article, or the bit that creates more interesting responses in you. If an article creates no such responses in you, then the way to use HN in the intended spirit is to look at at different article instead.