It's not clickbait if you're into physics, because then the article is exactly what you'd expect. But a lot of people in the general public tend to mistake "particle" for "elementary particle" which would of course be a much bigger discovery that would not end up a side note in some blogs and instead be on the front page of every science news outlet. At least that seems to be what got people fed up in the old post's comments.
If you already know what the truth is, how is it bait? Or were you actually secretly hoping to see a nobel worthy press release by one of the large LHC collaborations in a random news site that somehow slipped through every physicists daily life until then? Because that would be a different problem...
Comments
Discussion (16 points, 2 days ago, 7 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42400179
Thanks. That submission got flagged (presumably as clickbait). Any reason this one shouldn't too?
It's not clickbait if you're into physics, because then the article is exactly what you'd expect. But a lot of people in the general public tend to mistake "particle" for "elementary particle" which would of course be a much bigger discovery that would not end up a side note in some blogs and instead be on the front page of every science news outlet. At least that seems to be what got people fed up in the old post's comments.
I am a physics professor and I think this is borderline clickbait.
What kind of discovery did you expect when you clicked on the link?
I expected it to be clickbait and be a quasi-particle.
If you already know what the truth is, how is it bait? Or were you actually secretly hoping to see a nobel worthy press release by one of the large LHC collaborations in a random news site that somehow slipped through every physicists daily life until then? Because that would be a different problem...
Being able to recognize clickbait doesn't make the clickbait not clickbait.
I really hope you prefix all your statements in life with that.