5 ms·
In my opinion, the reasons for the reaction here are: 1. The technology is "dual use" and the negative examples like you described can be regulated away in gen
by bpt3 6y ago
In my opinion, the reasons for the reaction here are:
1. The technology is "dual use" and the negative examples like you described can be regulated away in general, so the benefits remain and abuse is reduced and punished when it does occur.
2. The over the top bias inherent in the site is offputting to anyone not in completely agreement with the ideology of the creators of the site, which represents a fringe of American society in my experience.
- Can_Not 6y ago>which represents a fringe of American society in my experience. *fringe of the HN demographic
- bpt3 6y agoWell in this case, yes by default. Are you implying that the US population in general is more aligned with the ideology of the submission?
- Can_Not 6y agoWhen I'm at work, I'm almost the only person who is not (yet) a homeowner. When I'm with my friends, I'm almost the only person who makes more than $X and might be a home owner in the next 5 years. You not talking to poor people is not the absence of poor people existing.
- bpt3 6y agoAs I suspected, you have nothing but baseless insults and vague complaints to back up your opinion. I can assure you that the views expressed by this project represent a fringe of the US population, and based on this interaction and previous ones with other individuals with a similar mindset, I sincerely hope it remains that way.
- Can_Not 6y ago> baseless insults Such as...?