Hacker News Reader

Comment by dang | Hacker News Reader

The original url [1] was blogspam—that is, it was a knock-off (or excerpt) of some other, more original source. In such cases HN strongly prefers the original source.

Submitters: blogspam is usually easy to recognize. Please check for that and post the original instead.

1. http://news.sciencemag.org/signal-noise/2014/04/face-recogni...

View on HN

If we're going to go that route, linking to the actual paper might be even more appropriate. Even the blog article is only a second hand source.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.3840v1.pdf

If you read it carefully, there's a caveat about how this particular dataset (recognition of /cropped/ pictures of /unfamiliar/ persons) has relatively low human accuracy (97.5% as opposed to 99.2%), because humans also use other features. That is, there's more work to be done, and facial recognition isn't a "solved" problem yet.

All the same, very impressive work. Congratulations to the authors on achieving such an important milestone.

It's true that the paper is the original source, and it's certainly ok to post those. But a user pointed out recently [1] that many HN users might have time to read a good general-interest article but not the paper itself—and usually the paper is referenced in the thread for those who want it. So either is ok, but if you're going to post a general-interest article, try to make it the most substantive one out there.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7625534

True, although the original had already been submitted without any traction: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7634123

Had he tried to post the original (perhaps he did) it would have been denied as a duplicate. What do you suggest is the right thing to do in that case?

You can modify the URL slightly. The duplicate detector is deliberately left porous to allow the best articles multiple cracks at the bat. A small number of reposts is ok. Reposting the same thing over and over, however, is not ok, nor is deleting and reposting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com