Why is the top voted comment so often about the title of the story? I guess it's because it's the first thing we interact with and it frames our expectations, but man alive, the title is probably the least interesting thing about any article posted to HN but consistently I see top rated comments talking about the title. Maybe it's just lowest-common-denominator.
And it's not that I think the comments themselves are bad, it's just weird to me that I consistently see them at the top of the page.
Apologies for the meta rant, it won't happen again, at least from me. (In fact the reason we have a lot of meta comments might be the same as the reason we have a lot of title-comments making me a bit hypocritical, but I digress.)
For example. I saw the title, clicked through (also opened comments), gave the page a once-over (didn't even read) -- came back here, and saw that first post. I also agree with the guy said, I thought they came up with some amazing new way to view regular diffs in 3D. So, I would have upvoted. Maybe it's just me, but I'm guessing far more people do that
In short, I found the comment useful, it not necessarily inspiring of conversation (although a discussion of different visualizations of changes may be worthwhile).
Cue swordfish music.
Now I think about it, it's super cool that GitHub are putting so much effort into being a useful platform for file formats traditionally not associated (much) with software development.
There is so much cool stuff you could investigate over and above text files: understanding photoshop files and describing layer changes; diffing audio and identifying mixes and how they were mixed.
Now I generally try to keep an open mind when I see things in movies as elements, while they may not be entirely correct, are sometimes based on reality. It just happens to be a portion of reality you are unfamiliar with.
Not sure how this would work in practise, or even if it'd be useful to be honest...