Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This is a great example of why HN's policy of not changing headlines from the originals doesn't work well sometimes. This headline is almost necessarily clickbait. There is nothihng this article could possibly be about that is actually related to the four-letter title, except maybe this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerk_%28physics%29

But that is not what this article is about. It's about (spoiler alert) quitting your job to write games.




I clicked because I wanted to know what sort of jerk they were talking about. The first to come to mind was indeed Jerk (Physics). I read the article, I found what I set out to find and more.

I'm curious to learn how you define clickbait. Did I get baited?

By the way, physics/everything in games works in discrete steps of time. Accordingly, acceleration is constant[0] and so it follows that in game(dev), infinite[1] jerk is a constant[2].

[0] acceleration is unchanging during each physics step

[1] changes in constant acceleration occur instantaneously, "between" steps so we're dividing by zero (seconds) and I get to make the rules

[2] unavoidable; as in "the bickering was a constant"


> I'm curious to learn how you define clickbait.

Pretty much like this:

> I clicked because I wanted to know what ... they were talking about.


No the article is about the quest to make music that changed tempo, exactly the kind of jerk you linked (the author even links the same Wikipedia page towards the end).


I mean, it's still a poor title for HN.


It's a great title/article pair for HN because it's unexpected/good, as opposed to clickbait which is unexpected/bad. The guidelines permit changing the original title in the case of clickbait anyways.


> it's unexpected/good

That depends on your interests. If you care about the finer points of sound editing embedded in a rather extensive personal narrative then yeah, it's good. Otherwise not so much.


Agreed, I'm personally not a huge fan of needing to spend 3+ minutes just to figure out if I care about the article. I was tying to find the connection to physics and it turns out that the connection is literally just "rate of change^n" which was never even implemented in the project from the article.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: