4 ms·
Interesting that you don't see this post as containing significant new information. The Business Insider article had only the briefest of mentions of the NSA,
by jdp23 11y ago
Interesting that you don't see this post as containing significant new information. The Business Insider article had only the briefest of mentions of the NSA, and nothing about the political consequences, and doesn't have any perspectives from US privacy and civil liberties organizations. The EFF unsurprisingly gives more context on all of these aspects. So the net result is a textbook example of Hacker News' "objective" policies penalizing alternate perspectives.
- dang 11y agoThere's a fallacy here (what's its name? maybe just sample bias?) where you're assuming that we've analyzed this as closely as you have, therefore must be making as precise a judgment as you, therefore must have an opposite agenda to you, therefore must have a hidden opposite agenda to you. But that's not how HN moderation works. In reality it's probabilistic: all we do all day is guess. There's no hope of reading every story closely and making precise calls. Not even close! If you'd do what other users (including other users who feel strongly about mass surveillance) do—consider the tradeoffs and help clarify which stories are best by HN's standards—you'll get better results than accusing us of sinister silencing.
- dwwoelfel 11y agoI don't think he's accusing you of anything sinister. To me, it sounds like he's saying "here is the result of your policy". It's almost as if you're both saying the same thing :).