[conorcleary]

Submitters need to get back to more descriptive titles on HN. If this post is the first and only exposure to this project for a user, "Project Naptha" alone doesn't give me confidence to roll the dice and click on an unknown link unless there are existing comments I can investigate. Thus, chicken and egg, scroll by.

[cyberbanjo]

Browser extension OCR: From the homepage "Project Naptha automatically applies state-of-the-art computer vision algorithms on every image you see while browsing the web. The result is a seamless and intuitive experience, where you can highlight as well as copy and paste and even edit and translate the text formerly trapped within an image. "

[lmm]

They probably put a descriptive title and then had a mod edit it to use the non-descriptive page title instead, as per HN's usual policy and practice.

[em-bee]

i don't think that happened. in my understanding that rule applies to article titles, not to site titles.

in my opinion, when posting a site, then a description, ideally taken from the site, should be included.

this is kind of a variation of a "show HN", like "look what i found"

[1123581321]

I never heard of it and I clicked because the name intrigued me. You might benefit from a link preview extension to reduce the friction to explore links before comments.

[jessmartin]

Adding the "subtitle" from the site itself would provide at least a bit of helpful context: "highlight, copy, and translate text from any image."

[latchkey]

True, that said, it made it to the front page... and while not everything on the front page is super interesting, it does give it a bit weight on the dice roll fun.