It's amusing but a bit underwhelming, he's simply mapping a grid of pixels to segments, he's not taking the shape and orientation of the segments into account at all.
This style of comment isn't very good here because it comes across as putting down someone else's work. Some of that is just cultural and linguistic convention, of course, but on HN it's important; we know from long experience how it affects the community.
It would be easy to rework this into a good comment by expressing your point additively rather than as fault-finding. For example, mention "shape and orientation of the segments" as the next thing to take into account and add some information about how one might do that. Then you're helping all of us learn.
It would be easy to rework this into a good comment by expressing your point additively rather than as fault-finding. For example, mention "shape and orientation of the segments" as the next thing to take into account and add some information about how one might do that. Then you're helping all of us learn.