Re:Mathematicians Measure Infinities, Find They’re Equal
by burkaman on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:29PM
(#15239864)
Why do you think this is clickbait? The headline accurately describes the content of the article, which as far as I can tell accurately describes one result of this paper. Clickbait doesn't mean any interesting headline, it means a misleading and purely attention-grabbing headline.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Mathematicians Measure Infinities, Find They’re Equal
by xamuel on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:39PM
(#15239968)
It's like if someone proved P=NP and the magazine title was: "Mathematicians Measure Difficulty Levels, Find They're Equal."
Re:Mathematicians Measure Infinities, Find They’re Equal
by SilasX on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @01:51PM
(#15240738)
Clickbait refers to vague titles that also overhype the story. Your example, if anything, underhypes it.
Re:Mathematicians Measure Infinities, Find They’re Equal
by burkaman on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @01:03PM
(#15240243)
That's not a good headline, but it's not clickbait. If P vs. NP were a fairly obscure problem with little immediate impact outside of academia, that would be a fine layperson headline.
What would you have titled this Quanta article?
Re:Mathematicians Measure Infinities, Find They’re Equal
by l3k on Wednesday September 13, 2017 @12:54PM
(#15240132)
Maybe I misread, but I feel like solving P=NP would be closer to solving the continuum hypothesis whereas the article describes solving a related problem which could have disproved the hypothesis should it have been found that the two sets were not equal.