What Does Harper Lee Want?

bloomberg.com

16 points·mactitan··8 comments

Whoops. Got me. Very embarrassing. I tried to be fancy by grafting the ordinary, non-physics meaning of the word onto the more specific, scientific use. Just pretentious and ignorant--a really great combination.

You replied to the parent instead of the top-level poster.

Wait, actually?

[little odd for an author/former editor to join HN and respond to a relatively low profile comment]

> “This Watchman publication is what physicists call a singularity. There has been nothing like it before now, and there never will be again,” says Daniel Menaker, a former editor at Random House

You'd think someone in the business of words would be less likely to abuse terminology they don't understand.

On the contrary -- I'd imagine that it'd make them more likely to use words poetically.

Metaphor. (Or Simile?) ==> That's one core competency for writers, and what will save their jobs from the software-eating-our-jobs phenomenon. Auto-generated sports event summaries, etc., can't hunt when it comes to style. I hear tech companies are hiring more editors and writers for their content.

I guess you have a point though in that they're comparing it to a Kurzweil Singularity, not the physics/math singularity.

Well, that quote is definitely awkward. But a "singularity" can mean a singular event, like (the moment before?) the Big Bang.

The piece as a whole was really well-researched, and convinced me that Harper Lee is being abused, or at the very least spoken for.

The singularity line took me for a very mild loop & didn't distract from the article. It's disconcerting that carter can be taking advantage of the situation given all that Harper represents(maybe it takes a law degree:(

Reply on news.ycombinator.com