6 ms·
> Apples to oranges... That's kind of the article's point. It explains how it's an apples to oranges comparison. If that's obvious to you, you don't need to re
by dao- 7y ago
> Apples to oranges...
That's kind of the article's point. It explains how it's an apples to oranges comparison. If that's obvious to you, you don't need to read it.
- andybak 7y agoYep. It's almost as if the person posting that hadn't finished reading the article.
- learnstats2 7y agoIf it's obvious to me that the headline's intent is to mislead for clickbait purposes, then I probably ain't gonna bother reading the article, sorry.
- Jasper_ 7y agoPlease let me know how my title was clickbait-y, or a better title you might prefer. It wasn't my intention to mislead, and I am open to suggestions for better titles.
- gugagore 7y agoI am not sure if I understand the objection. Is that that you don't agree with the use of "2D graphics" and "3D graphics" to mean what they mean in the article?
- learnstats2 7y agoSorry, I didn't realise you were the article's author. I'm answering with in good faith and with good will to you :) Most of the article doesn't seem relevant to the headline, and as such I found it difficult to understand where the article was leading and why I should be interested to read on. If the headline was something like "Parallel histories of 2D and 3D vector graphics" then I would have understood what I was committing to read and been more satisfied with the overall experience. Obviously, the article has found an audience so perhaps I am wrong and you can safely ignore this thought ;-)