Africa developing its first supercomputer outside South Africa
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
Equivalent headline:
World developing its first supercomputer outside of countries which already have one.
How about instead:
Kenya developing its first supercomputer, the first one in Africa outside of South Africa
I think this places the focus rightly on Kenya, rather than implying that somehow this is an effort by all of Africa.
Or even better:
iHub developing the first supercomputer in Kenya
That's probably the best one, since it places the focus correctly on iHub (which deserves it) and Kenya indirectly (which also deserves it). The fact that it's the first country outside ZA to do so can then be mentioned as a lead-in hook in the article, instead of delivering this silly title...
Africa is an enormous continent that is sadly very, very, very far from being able to function as a unit.
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
which say, "You can make up a new title if you want, but if you put gratuitous editorial spin on it, the editors may rewrite it." I generally find it is helpful for submitters on HN to submit original article titles. Then if we disagree with the original article title, as you evidently do here, we can agree to hold the person who kindly submitted the article harmless, and blame the editors of Ars Technica this time for a less than ideal title.
(For what it's worth, I have observed one case where an HN submitter submitted an original article title, which was then changed by the curators when commenters howled about it. The title changed from
http://independentsciencenews.org/news/23andme-disproves-its...
to
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2813270
I still think it was correct for the article to be submitted here on HN with the original title that time and this time, even if the title is subject to legitimate disagreement.)
I agree with your basic geographic point, hence an upvote from me for your comment.
It's not like Europe is functioning that much better as unit. And almost continent sized new world countries like Brazil and the US are not something the old world should try to replicate.
[1] Please don't argue with this. This is common usage in modern day English, even if you might not like it. You know it, I know it, we all know it. Also note that the Estados Unidos Mexicanos (United Mexican States) are commonly referred to as just Mexico, so why should there be a problem with calling the "United States of America" just "America" for short?
Also, you seriously don't expect Americans to know that Africa is made up of many countries, nor understand the difference between Morocco and Kongo (for instance)? As a non-American, that's rather shocking.
[0] http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/10/20/debunki...
Unfortunately (or fortunately, rather) while the geographical terminology is correct, I'm not sure the technical terminology is. The Ars article (and the blog it was largely copied from) says there is "little to no capacity for cloud computing" (outside South Africa) which is not the same as "no supercomputers."
I wouldn't expect an American to know this.
You can't be serious.
When we refer to the market on the actual continent we refer to it as Africa (or the african market), so in a way it's implicit that we're talking about countries in the north.
yay for them! :)