12 ms·

What was the previous title? The current one is the same as the name of the provided link. If you don't like the title, blame the author. Mods, afaik, are ju

What was the previous title? The current one is the same as the name of the provided link. If you don't like the title, blame the author. Mods, afaik, are just trying to follow the rule that the submission should reflect the title of the article.

jaredmcateer 12y ago
I agree it was stupid of the author to not have realized his presentation to a captive audience would be linked to the public and made it a more compelling title for casual consumption
Alupis 12y ago
The title I first saw was: Josh Bloch Fights a LIDAR Speeding Ticket (with Science) Which is much better than the currently edited version.
- timdierks 12y ago
  I submitted the link with the title you note for the following three reasons: 1. Josh Bloch is an author of particular interest to this community. 2. When I searched to see if the page had already been submitted, I noted that recent HN posts on LIDAR were on technical laser ranging (e.g. in mapping applications), not on speed enforcement. 3. I thought it was an article that would be of interest to HN readers, so I thought they would be well-served by an appealing link title which conveyed the content and tone of the presentation and invited a click.
  - diminoten 12y ago
    From the guidelines: > Please don't do things to make titles stand out, like using uppercase or exclamation points, or adding a parenthetical remark saying how great an article is. It's implicit in submitting something that you think it's important. and > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait.
    - kareemm 12y ago
      > Please don't do things to make titles stand out, like using uppercase or exclamation points, or adding a parenthetical remark saying how great an article is. It's implicit in submitting something that you think it's important. The submitter didn't do this. > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. Guidelines != rules. Sometimes authors write poor headlines (this is a great example). The community benefits from headlines that are more descriptive of the article. Having mods change them back for consistency's sake harms HN more than it helps.
      - diminoten 12y ago
        I'd rather be on a website that errs on the side of "no linkbait" than a website that allows too much linkbait.
        brianpgordon 12y ago
        I'd rather not be on a website that takes itself so seriously that people obsess over rules/guidelines. It seems like every popular post has this confusion and argument about changing titles.
    - eric_h 12y ago
      The original title is, indeed, misleading. The article is not about LIDAR specifically, but about how LIDAR is (mis)used in speed enforcement. IMO, the title change was warranted.
      - diminoten 12y ago
        I think at this point your beef is with PG himself, or whoever he had write those guidelines. The thing the mods are trying to avoid is link baiting, and they tend to err on the side of "no exceptions". I prefer this, as any other option may lead to more unintentional bias, or worse.
        12y ago
  - DanBC 12y ago
    "The Lowdown on LIDAR (Josh Blochs presentation)" is 47 chars and would probably have been kept. Your title is link-baity. "Beats speeding ticket" and "with science" are obvious link bait. I'm kind of surprised that you thought your replacements would stick.
    - timdierks 12y ago
      How would a reader know that this has to do with speeding radar, and not LIDAR use in ranging / mapping? And I think it's relevant that the content of the presentation is scientific/analytic, rather than related to using legal strategies to invalidate a speeding ticket, for example.
  - cdash 12y ago
    I saw the title after it was changed and I definitely thought that this was going to be a technical article about LIDAR in its 3D mapping application.
- rmrfrmrf 12y ago
  > Which is much better than the currently edited version. Not in my opinion. The speeding ticket Mr. Bloch fights is a secondary point to the main purpose of the presentation.

jaredmcateer 12y ago

I agree it was stupid of the author to not have realized his presentation to a captive audience would be linked to the public and made it a more compelling title for casual consumption

Alupis 12y ago

The title I first saw was: Josh Bloch Fights a LIDAR Speeding Ticket (with Science) Which is much better than the currently edited version.

timdierks 12y ago
I submitted the link with the title you note for the following three reasons: 1. Josh Bloch is an author of particular interest to this community. 2. When I searched to see if the page had already been submitted, I noted that recent HN posts on LIDAR were on technical laser ranging (e.g. in mapping applications), not on speed enforcement. 3. I thought it was an article that would be of interest to HN readers, so I thought they would be well-served by an appealing link title which conveyed the content and tone of the presentation and invited a click.
- diminoten 12y ago
  From the guidelines: > Please don't do things to make titles stand out, like using uppercase or exclamation points, or adding a parenthetical remark saying how great an article is. It's implicit in submitting something that you think it's important. and > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait.
  - kareemm 12y ago
    > Please don't do things to make titles stand out, like using uppercase or exclamation points, or adding a parenthetical remark saying how great an article is. It's implicit in submitting something that you think it's important. The submitter didn't do this. > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. Guidelines != rules. Sometimes authors write poor headlines (this is a great example). The community benefits from headlines that are more descriptive of the article. Having mods change them back for consistency's sake harms HN more than it helps.
    - diminoten 12y ago
      I'd rather be on a website that errs on the side of "no linkbait" than a website that allows too much linkbait.
      - brianpgordon 12y ago
        I'd rather not be on a website that takes itself so seriously that people obsess over rules/guidelines. It seems like every popular post has this confusion and argument about changing titles.
  - eric_h 12y ago
    The original title is, indeed, misleading. The article is not about LIDAR specifically, but about how LIDAR is (mis)used in speed enforcement. IMO, the title change was warranted.
    - diminoten 12y ago
      I think at this point your beef is with PG himself, or whoever he had write those guidelines. The thing the mods are trying to avoid is link baiting, and they tend to err on the side of "no exceptions". I prefer this, as any other option may lead to more unintentional bias, or worse.
      - 12y ago
- DanBC 12y ago
  "The Lowdown on LIDAR (Josh Blochs presentation)" is 47 chars and would probably have been kept. Your title is link-baity. "Beats speeding ticket" and "with science" are obvious link bait. I'm kind of surprised that you thought your replacements would stick.
  - timdierks 12y ago
    How would a reader know that this has to do with speeding radar, and not LIDAR use in ranging / mapping? And I think it's relevant that the content of the presentation is scientific/analytic, rather than related to using legal strategies to invalidate a speeding ticket, for example.
- cdash 12y ago
  I saw the title after it was changed and I definitely thought that this was going to be a technical article about LIDAR in its 3D mapping application.
rmrfrmrf 12y ago
> Which is much better than the currently edited version. Not in my opinion. The speeding ticket Mr. Bloch fights is a secondary point to the main purpose of the presentation.