|
|
|
|
|
|
by jasode
3974 days ago
|
|
|
>So basically you want to know whether you're interested in something without actually bothering to understand it?
[...]
I don't think that authors have any responsibility to dumb down their titles into summaries for those who can't be arsed to hear them out. I may have misunderstood voidz's question but I don't think he's asking for a dumbed-down tldr or something to be spoonfed to him. The keyword I read in his question was "context". In other words, was there another event or news article that prompted the OP to submit "Hole Argument" and for multiple people to vote on it enough to have it show up on the HN front page? For example, on the front page there's a post "Python is the new BASIC"... it's an old 2008 article... why is it there?!? I think many of us can guess that its submission was possibly triggered by the other article "Guido on Python" from EuroCon 2015". Reverse engineering the context is a little easier in that case. The "Hole Argument" is interesting, but there are thousands of interesting physics articles... so maybe there's another trigger that prompted its submission. E.g. a recent discovery at Hadron Collider, or one of the authors recently passed away, etc. Of course, the article's submission may be purely random in which case there is no context. The submitter (infinity) can clarify that for the voidz. |
|
|
Okay, I'll just quote voidz's response to the same post you're responding to:
> Most of all, I wanted to kick off the discussion by asking if we should guess what information the link would give us. From the title alone, I have no idea. It's a play on words ("the hole / whole argument"), but beyond that, i had no clue.
Can you think of a way to get "what information the link would give us" without it being a dumbed-down tldr?