42 ms·
To be honest, it would be awesome if the title could be change from "Methane may not warm the Earth quite as much as previously thought" to "Methane is 20x wors
by henearkr 3y ago
To be honest, it would be awesome if the title could be change from "Methane may not warm the Earth quite as much as previously thought" to "Methane is 20x worse than CO2 instead of 28x worse".
- xwdv 3y agoThe heading should just be “Methane 20x worse than CO2”. There is no need to mention previous thought, most people had no previous thoughts.
- freedomben 3y agoI agree with you that would be a better title, for a number of reasons. However I would advocate against changing it. The title here on HN is the same as the title in the original/linked article. Something I personally live about HN is we don't editorialize by rewriting headlines to reframe things to fit our preferred perception (even when we really believe that perception is correct). This is important for cognitive diversity.
- Aachen 3y agoI don't know if it's the "HN is deteriorating" effect finally setting in after a decade, but I do feel like titles either made more sense at the source or were changed to make sense in the past (say, before 2020±1). Now the homepage very often has 10-30% titles that either make no sense or mislead, and you have to click to know what it's about. Might as well just have a list of hashes then and see where you end up. Opening it now: titles like Boustrophedon and XINF (those two words are two submissions' entire titles) aren't useful and should be added to, for example. Similar for this article: it's not editorialising ("expressing one's opinion rather than the facts") to make it reflect what the source is trying to say.