4 ms·

> Second, I think some people (like you) object to any attention-grabbing headline, for no reason at all. It was a good article, and that was a good quote to us

> Second, I think some people (like you) object to any attention-grabbing headline, for no reason at all. It was a good article, and that was a good quote to use to get people to click and read. I think that's unfair. If an attention grabbing headline is deceptive but leads to a good article, it's still deceptive.

andrewljohnson 14y ago
But it's not deceptive, it's what Linus said, and I think it gets at a good key idea in the interview - that Linus has transitioned from being primarily a code reviewer to primarily a manager of people. The part about moving to being a manager of people is just not included in the headline - you learn that by clicking the intriguing title.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  That quote, on it's own, has a very different meaning to readers if it is not accompanied by the rest of the article. That is why it is deceptive. Now, of course you could say that you should read the article and then you would not be left with the wrong impression... but I think few people read the articles of every headline that they see. Nor should they be expected to, our time is all valuable, we can't all do HN 24/7. Certainly you should always read the article before commenting, but as it stands this headline is deceptive to people who plan on doing neither. Nor is it reasonable to expect people to not take away impressions from headlines that they don't plan on investigating further. Even if you decided to do that, it would be near impossible to prevent yourself from making unconscious associations. Headlines should be short, more or less informative, but never deceptive. "Massive PHP bug ...that I almost let through code-review" and "Massive PHP bug" could both be headlines to the same article, but one is deceptive. Unfortunately, it is also the one that is likely to get more hits... Readers who do not particularly find PHP of interest will skip reading either, but the second headline will also (unjustly) form/strengthen a negative association they have with PHP.
  - dpark 14y ago
    > That quote, on it's own, has a very different meaning to readers if it is not accompanied by the rest of the article. No, it doesn't. I read the title, then I read the entire article, and at the end, I was left with the understanding that Linus Torvalds no longer reads the code for kernel patches, which was exactly what I expected from the title. The only people who might possibly be confused by the title are people who try to be hyper-literal and pedantic, but those are the same people who would see a quote that says "I don't read" and assume it means the person quoted is illiterate. That kind of thing is a reader-specific problem, and not a problem with the quote.
    - jlgreco 14y ago
      All that I can tell you concretely is that when I read the headline, this is more or less what went through my head: >"!?! ...something seems off, I better check the comments for quick clarification" I then went to the comments, found (as the top comment) a clear clarification, and upvoted it. Now, that initial "!?!", roughly described as a combination of apprehension and alarm, was not the product of hyper-literalism. Rather it was the product of the headline text and several fuzzy associations I have formed over the years, conscious and otherwise. A quick sampling of some of the prominent conscious associations, translated to english, could be "HN loves when Linus says crazy things", "Linus doesn't write code, he manages and merges.", and "News means something has changed". Had I been less interested in the topic of "Linus says things", I would have left it at that and moved onto another article. I think I would describe the notion "It cannot be deceptive because it is a quote and true" as the real hyper-literalism. Truth and deception are not mutually exclusive by any means.
      - dpark 14y ago
        I didn't say a quote cannot be deceptive. I don't see this one as even remotely deceptive, though. If you know who Linus is, you know he owns the Linux kernel. A quote about him not reading code would therefore be taken to refer to the kernel code. In that context, the quote is accurate. Linus by his own admission is not reading the kernel code any more.

andrewljohnson 14y ago

But it's not deceptive, it's what Linus said, and I think it gets at a good key idea in the interview - that Linus has transitioned from being primarily a code reviewer to primarily a manager of people. The part about moving to being a manager of people is just not included in the headline - you learn that by clicking the intriguing title.

jlgreco 14y ago
That quote, on it's own, has a very different meaning to readers if it is not accompanied by the rest of the article. That is why it is deceptive. Now, of course you could say that you should read the article and then you would not be left with the wrong impression... but I think few people read the articles of every headline that they see. Nor should they be expected to, our time is all valuable, we can't all do HN 24/7. Certainly you should always read the article before commenting, but as it stands this headline is deceptive to people who plan on doing neither. Nor is it reasonable to expect people to not take away impressions from headlines that they don't plan on investigating further. Even if you decided to do that, it would be near impossible to prevent yourself from making unconscious associations. Headlines should be short, more or less informative, but never deceptive. "Massive PHP bug ...that I almost let through code-review" and "Massive PHP bug" could both be headlines to the same article, but one is deceptive. Unfortunately, it is also the one that is likely to get more hits... Readers who do not particularly find PHP of interest will skip reading either, but the second headline will also (unjustly) form/strengthen a negative association they have with PHP.
- dpark 14y ago
  > That quote, on it's own, has a very different meaning to readers if it is not accompanied by the rest of the article. No, it doesn't. I read the title, then I read the entire article, and at the end, I was left with the understanding that Linus Torvalds no longer reads the code for kernel patches, which was exactly what I expected from the title. The only people who might possibly be confused by the title are people who try to be hyper-literal and pedantic, but those are the same people who would see a quote that says "I don't read" and assume it means the person quoted is illiterate. That kind of thing is a reader-specific problem, and not a problem with the quote.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    All that I can tell you concretely is that when I read the headline, this is more or less what went through my head: >"!?! ...something seems off, I better check the comments for quick clarification" I then went to the comments, found (as the top comment) a clear clarification, and upvoted it. Now, that initial "!?!", roughly described as a combination of apprehension and alarm, was not the product of hyper-literalism. Rather it was the product of the headline text and several fuzzy associations I have formed over the years, conscious and otherwise. A quick sampling of some of the prominent conscious associations, translated to english, could be "HN loves when Linus says crazy things", "Linus doesn't write code, he manages and merges.", and "News means something has changed". Had I been less interested in the topic of "Linus says things", I would have left it at that and moved onto another article. I think I would describe the notion "It cannot be deceptive because it is a quote and true" as the real hyper-literalism. Truth and deception are not mutually exclusive by any means.
    - dpark 14y ago
      I didn't say a quote cannot be deceptive. I don't see this one as even remotely deceptive, though. If you know who Linus is, you know he owns the Linux kernel. A quote about him not reading code would therefore be taken to refer to the kernel code. In that context, the quote is accurate. Linus by his own admission is not reading the kernel code any more.