Type 1 without extra qualifiers refers to diabetes.
Type 1 without extra qualifiers refers to diabetes.
Personally, I wouldn’t associate “type 1” without context with diabetes over its other possible meanings (type 1 fonts, type 1 errors, type 1 hypervisors, HIV type 1, herpes type 1, etc). Diabetes may well be the most famous example, but numbered types are very popular in medical science, and many other fields besides
I guess that article would be titled, "The coming end of Type 1"
That may very well be accurate.
In your world, though.
[Which is not to say that the headline shouldn't be disambiguity]
An article about research that could mean the end of Type 1 diabetes would hardly be out of place here, though I agree that assuming that "Type 1" without qualifiers automatically refers to diabetes is not a safe bet here, if anywhere.
If you're going to be that nitpicky, this article isn't about anything that could reasonable be called "computer science" either
You probably meant this: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
And that doesn't mention computer science either. Instead it says this:
> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
Note that this doesn't even mention technology, just "startups" and "hacking" (which to be clear isn't specifically about technology either).