3 ms·
It looks like almost everyone here thinks this is wrong and poorly argued (as do I). A meta question to ponder: why did this get upvoted to the front page? Is i
by dooglius 6y ago
It looks like almost everyone here thinks this is wrong and poorly argued (as do I). A meta question to ponder: why did this get upvoted to the front page? Is it that upvoters tend to not read the articles whereas commenters do? Do people upvote stuff they think is wrong for the purpose of discussion?
- kardos 6y ago> A meta question to ponder: why did this get upvoted to the front page? The author is a sort of expert in the field, if he's calling out reproducible builds as security theatre, it's worth discussing
- bluGill 6y agoBecause there are good points. Reproducible builds are not everything some people think, but they are still useful. Knowing what is wrong with them is important.
- moobsen 6y agoAs much as we like to pretend to only look at the arguments itself, I think part of the reason is because Travis is a pretty well known hacker. If I or you had published it, it probably would not have made it to the front page. Even if I disagree with his overall opinion on reproducible builds, I think he does bring forward valid arguments and I personally took something away from reading his blog post (e.g. the word bugdoor). But to your point, I think up-voting is a sign of approval, while commenting usually is used to criticize. Why would anyone comment on something they 100% agree with?