Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by eagerpace | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

eagerpace·

It’s hard for me to read an article when the clickbait headline is completely walked back in the first paragraph.

View on HN

How so? I didn’t see that it contradicts the headline

How so?

“These boundaries are not tipping points—it’s possible to recover from passing them”

Debatable whether that is completely walking back the headline, but the headline is clearly trying to give the impression it's irreversible without actually making a claim that could thereby be defeated: “brink”, “breaching”, “boundaries” “support life” are all very suggestive of irreversible doom, and yet…

Ah. I see where you’re coming from but don’t really agree - I think you’re (understandably!) bringing in that assumption yourself from general climate worries. Countries have boundaries that you can come back from after crossing, as do people. I mean, they’re kinda describing the framework directly.

How else would you phrase it? “About to cross a line indicating serious danger”? Maybe “approaching a scientific benchmark tied to catastrophic risk”?

Like I said in another reply, the applicability of “walking it back” is certainly subject to debate. I'm not arguing the point, just pulling out the obvious triggering line and explaining where I think the sentiment is coming from.

that isn't walking back that we're on the brink of breaching the 7th boundary. it just adds more detail into what these boundaries are.

that's not really walking it back... recovery is much more difficult than not causing the problem in the first place, and because it can be reversed doesn't mean it will be

Like I said, it's english prose and the applicability of “walking it back” is subject to debate. I'm not arguing the point, just pulling out the obvious triggering line and explaining where I think the sentiment is coming from.

but why

Reply on news.ycombinator.com