rules of thumb for titling more difficult HN submissions?
mechanical_fish: I took at look at your last two links.Let's be frank. Both of them are just too long. I went to physics grad school and am friends with some quantum cryptographers, and there's still no way I'm going to read the physics one -- not because it's uninteresting but because I have no time. (Indeed, I'm being dragged out the door right now.)Ditto the software estimation one. It's a whole research paper. In the words of Bruce Sterling, it's like chloroform on the screen.If you want to motivate folks to read and upmod on these subjects you have to do some blogging. Write a blog post that cites the paper. Call out some points and tell us why this paper is important. Maybe relate it to other stuff in the field that we know, or should know.Take a look at an issue of Nature. At the front there are a lot of little articles that summarize the content and the significance of the real research papers elsewhere in the journal. Try linking to something like that, even if you have to write it yourself. It is hard to do well (I co-wrote one once, and it was a lot of work) but practice makes perfect, and even a quick job is better than nothing.