5 ms·
The pipeline of a title is: 1. A blogger writes a short clickbait title with no information about what the article is about. (The real Miss Julie) 2. The hack
by CyberDildonics 3y ago
The pipeline of a title is:
1. A blogger writes a short clickbait title with no information about what the article is about. (The real Miss Julie)
2. The hacker news de-clickbait filter takes it from a generic, no context title to something grammatically incorrect and nonsensical. (The Miss Julie)
3. Someone changes the title but still doesn't give any context.
"Fish swim in the ocean" becomes "Fish the ocean" becomes "Scientist observe fish".
- prerok 3y agoGenuine interest: why is the title considered clickbaity? I understand that the automated system transformed it and in this case would consider the automation to be wrong, however I don't really see the article itself as clickbaity.
- CyberDildonics 3y agowhy is the title considered clickbaity? Because it has no information and there is no way to know what the article is about.
- CRConrad 3y agoIt obviously has information; you just didn't understand it. That's not a problem with the title.
- CyberDildonics 3y agoIf there was no problem with the title, then why was it changed?
- MarcelOlsz 3y agoIn other words, it's baiting me to click.
- pvg 3y agoThe automatic edit is obviously wrong but the title is not clickbait, the GP is just mistaken about that.
- gjm11 3y agoI don't think "The real Miss Julie" is a clickbaity title. It's a perplexing title if you haven't heard of Strindberg's play, for sure, but that's no different from a title like "Improving Kubernetes" or "Riemann Hypothesis proved", which will make sense only if you know about Kubernetes or the Riemann Hypothesis. If you _have_ heard of Strindberg's play and make the connection with the title, then the obvious interpretation is something like "it turns out that there was an actual person Strindberg's character was based on, and this article is about her". Which, as it happens, is exactly correct. I think it's worth distinguishing between "I can't tell what this is about from the title, because it's clickbait" and "I can't tell what this is about from the title, because I happen not to be familiar with the subject matter". This is the second of those, not the first. (For the avoidance of doubt, I am not in the least suggesting that there's anything wrong with happening not to be familiar with the subject matter.)
- CyberDildonics 3y agohat's no different from a title like "Improving Kubernetes" or "Riemann Hypothesis proved" It's completely different because there is no context, so it could be about anything, especially on a general technology 'news' site. "Riemann Hypothesis" is going not ambiguous and neither is anything with "Kubernetes" in the name. A generic sentence with a generic first name is. I think this is obvious to most people.
- quesera 3y agoHN is not a technology site. Not exclusively, anyway. Some days not even primarily! HN is an aggregator, so we pluck articles from varied contexts all the time. "Intellectual curiosity". But "Miss Julie" has exactly as much inherent context as "Riemann Hypothesis", or "Kubernetes". In all cases, a web search will return, as the first result, the correct reference. If we took a random sampling of people off the street, I'd be curious to see how many would recognize Miss Julie vs the other two. I lean toward more for Miss Julie! Anyway, what's a better title? "The Real Miss Julie (being a character in an eponymous 1888 play by Swedish playwright August Strindberg)"?