3 ms·

ChatGPT to the rescue: Provide an alternative title for "Updated imaging and phylogenetic comparative methods reassess relative temporal lobe size in anthropoi

ChatGPT to the rescue: Provide an alternative title for "Updated imaging and phylogenetic comparative methods reassess relative temporal lobe size in anthropoids and modern humans" so that layman people would understand. "Reevaluating Brain Size in Humans and Primates: New Techniques Show Surprising Results" Without clickbait "How Modern Imaging and Comparative Analysis are Helping us Understand the Evolution of Brain Size in Humans and Primates" :)

pferde 4y ago
Unless we're already living in Idiocracy, the original title was perfectly understandable by a layman. Do not underestimate your fellow humans. :)
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  Laymen won't be definining anthropoids or phylogenetic...
  - HPsquared 4y ago
    Neither does ChatGPT, it seems.
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      Primates seems like a good sub in to me for laypeople. Phylogenetic seems safe to remove. Where do you disagree?
      - HPsquared 4y ago
        Just that it seemed to drop the "phylogenetic" part. The importance of the word depends on what's actually in the article, I suppose.
      - alexvoda 4y ago
        What is wrong with laypeople learning the words "phylogenetic" and "anthropoid"? I am not a biologist, and my knowledge in the field is limited to what I learned in high school plus afterwards self study out of curiosity. I did know what "phylogenetic" refers to but I do not remember ever encountering the word "anthropoid". Yet I was perfectly able to infer what it means based on the meaning of the base and suffix. If I don't know a word I look it up. Have people stopped doing this?
        AndrewKemendo 4y ago
        >If I don't know a word I look it up. Have people stopped doing this? You should feel lucky that you are surrounded by curious people because it's not the norm for the world - though it's a great thing obviously. The process you describe is only done by an extreme minority of people. I'd challenge whether most ever did it.
        alexvoda 4y ago
        I would argue that it should not be a minority of people for a community (HN) which values curiosity as claimed by the guidelines: "the primary use of the site should be for curiosity" "On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. "
        oblio 4y ago
        You're both wrong and not-wrong. Not-wrong in the sense that in practice most adults are not curious about 99% of topics out there. Wrong in the sense that humans are naturally curious. I've seen it now with kids. It seems to me that what happens through childhood is that not only are neural pathways pruned for efficiency, but curiosity is actively stifled and arguably totally destroyed in most kids, by adults. Coupled with adulthood time/money pressures, I'm not surprised that a large number of adults become completely intellectually inert, or worse, fully anti-intellectual.
        4y ago

pferde 4y ago

Unless we're already living in Idiocracy, the original title was perfectly understandable by a layman. Do not underestimate your fellow humans. :)

spywaregorilla 4y ago
Laymen won't be definining anthropoids or phylogenetic...
- HPsquared 4y ago
  Neither does ChatGPT, it seems.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    Primates seems like a good sub in to me for laypeople. Phylogenetic seems safe to remove. Where do you disagree?
    - HPsquared 4y ago
      Just that it seemed to drop the "phylogenetic" part. The importance of the word depends on what's actually in the article, I suppose.
    - alexvoda 4y ago
      What is wrong with laypeople learning the words "phylogenetic" and "anthropoid"? I am not a biologist, and my knowledge in the field is limited to what I learned in high school plus afterwards self study out of curiosity. I did know what "phylogenetic" refers to but I do not remember ever encountering the word "anthropoid". Yet I was perfectly able to infer what it means based on the meaning of the base and suffix. If I don't know a word I look it up. Have people stopped doing this?
      - AndrewKemendo 4y ago
        >If I don't know a word I look it up. Have people stopped doing this? You should feel lucky that you are surrounded by curious people because it's not the norm for the world - though it's a great thing obviously. The process you describe is only done by an extreme minority of people. I'd challenge whether most ever did it.
        alexvoda 4y ago
        I would argue that it should not be a minority of people for a community (HN) which values curiosity as claimed by the guidelines: "the primary use of the site should be for curiosity" "On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. "
        oblio 4y ago
        You're both wrong and not-wrong. Not-wrong in the sense that in practice most adults are not curious about 99% of topics out there. Wrong in the sense that humans are naturally curious. I've seen it now with kids. It seems to me that what happens through childhood is that not only are neural pathways pruned for efficiency, but curiosity is actively stifled and arguably totally destroyed in most kids, by adults. Coupled with adulthood time/money pressures, I'm not surprised that a large number of adults become completely intellectually inert, or worse, fully anti-intellectual.
        4y ago