4 ms·

As much as I like a good political debate I wish HN restrict itself to more tech related articles rather than this. Sometimes tech has some political aspecst or

As much as I like a good political debate I wish HN restrict itself to more tech related articles rather than this. Sometimes tech has some political aspecst or we discuss the politics of certain tech companies, but this has nothing to do with either tech or tech companies, so why is it even here?

twodai 5y ago
Correct me if I'm incorrect but the idea of the hn forum is to discuss and share things which spark curiosity or something along those lines. I believe this article and conversation is incredibly curiosity inspiring. Also if hn was to deviate from that aim I think hn would really cease to be what it is.
- golemiprague 5y ago
  Well almost any subject can spark curiosity but there is some understanding that it has to be within the realm of some technological aspects, otherwise we can all go to reddit. I am not saying it is against the rules to put such an article, just that we should be careful not to expand the net too much.
api_or_ipa 5y ago
I agree. Most of the comments are disappointingly poor and as a result there's little actual critical discussion. I was really hoping to chime into a fruitful discussion about positive vs negative protection of the first amendment rights. 1A says "... Congress shall make no law ..." but California's Constitution (for example) goes farther to say "Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right". This lead to the fascinating Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins Supreme Court case[0] which surfaced the careful distinction between the two senses of Free Speech and the government's obligation to protect it. Where does an org like ACLU stand on what precisely defines Free Speech, and, the responsibilities of each State, Federal Govt and NGO like itself to protect it? IANAL, just someone who hoped we'd discuss things a bit more carefully on HN. 0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...

twodai 5y ago

Correct me if I'm incorrect but the idea of the hn forum is to discuss and share things which spark curiosity or something along those lines. I believe this article and conversation is incredibly curiosity inspiring. Also if hn was to deviate from that aim I think hn would really cease to be what it is.

golemiprague 5y ago
Well almost any subject can spark curiosity but there is some understanding that it has to be within the realm of some technological aspects, otherwise we can all go to reddit. I am not saying it is against the rules to put such an article, just that we should be careful not to expand the net too much.

api_or_ipa 5y ago

I agree. Most of the comments are disappointingly poor and as a result there's little actual critical discussion. I was really hoping to chime into a fruitful discussion about positive vs negative protection of the first amendment rights. 1A says "... Congress shall make no law ..." but California's Constitution (for example) goes farther to say "Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right". This lead to the fascinating Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins Supreme Court case[0] which surfaced the careful distinction between the two senses of Free Speech and the government's obligation to protect it. Where does an org like ACLU stand on what precisely defines Free Speech, and, the responsibilities of each State, Federal Govt and NGO like itself to protect it? IANAL, just someone who hoped we'd discuss things a bit more carefully on HN. 0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...