Hacker News Reader

Comment by sermah | Hacker News Reader

No. It’s not my first language too, but your version sounds odd. Usually you put an action first and only then the details

View on HN

Trouble is, from the existing title it's not clear who had the handicap. So the poster is right to try and fix it.

It's not clear from the revised title either though. In fact I found it even more confusing. The issue is the ambiguity of the wording "with a two-stone handicap", not where it's located in the sentence.

I would probably phrase it as 'Go grandmaster Shin defeats two-stone-handicapped AI KataGo'

Are there ads on the page? If so, let’s A/B test that along with “Grandmaster Shin Savagely Beats Handicapped Opponent”.

Sir, have you considered a career in social networking engagement?

Edit: 10 years since i made the HN account and I only now notice you can't see the scores of other people's comments. Here's hoping the brilliance of the above comment is appreciated.

Made my day

I only saw the "revised title" and yes, it's still confusing :)

With a two-stone handicap, Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo.

Go grandmaster Shin, playing with a two-stone handicap, defeats AI KataGo.

The problem is that "with a handicap" is in itself ambiguous. People sometimes use it positively, sometimes negatively. That is, you say that Shin had a two-stone handicap, that can in itself be understood as either "Shin was given an advantage of two stones over the AI" (the reality) or "Shin was playing with a disadvantage, giving the AI two extra stones" (the more common reading of "to have a handicap").

Reply on news.ycombinator.com