Live data from Hacker News

Google’s Acquhire Binge

gigaom.com

1–7 of 7 posts

Re: Google’s Acquhire Binge

#3
It took me a moment to parse the portmanteau of "acquire" and "hire," but I finally put it together. This article is currently the top hit for the neologism: http://www.google.com/search?q=acquhire

(My first impression of the headline was that it was some sort of quasi-literate mangling of an impossible headline about Google acquiring Bing.)

Re: Google’s Acquhire Binge

#5

It took me a moment to parse the portmanteau of "acquire" and "hire," but I finally put it together. This article is currently the top hit for the neologism: http://www.google.com/search?q=acquhire (My first impression of the headline was that it was some sort of quasi-literate mangling of an impossible headline about Google acquiring Bing.)

To me it just looked like a typo and immediately let me think "mhh, when the author can't even spell check his headline, what could the article be worth".

You never should do such things.

Re: Google’s Acquhire Binge

#6

We all know they did it because of the name. They just want traffic from people misspelling Bing.

On reading the title, I too thought Googlers might have found it amusing to acquire a company called Binge. But then, thankfully, I read the article.

This makes me think though - we are losing some information by making the titles into Title Case, namely the information of what is a proper noun and what is not. Is the slightly improved readability worth the loss? I personally don't think so.

Re: Google’s Acquhire Binge

#7

It took me a moment to parse the portmanteau of "acquire" and "hire," but I finally put it together. This article is currently the top hit for the neologism: http://www.google.com/search?q=acquhire (My first impression of the headline was that it was some sort of quasi-literate mangling of an impossible headline about Google acquiring Bing.)

acquihire would have been a better neologism