2 ms·
I think the person concerned is taking zero personal risk by displaying a view that is backed up by 99% all of media (even if no 99% of all people). If they ha
by gadders 5y ago
I think the person concerned is taking zero personal risk by displaying a view that is backed up by 99% all of media (even if no 99% of all people).
If they had a banner saying "Trump 2024" or "The AZOV Battalion are Nazis" I might not agree with them, but at least they are taking some personal risk of cancellation.
- noelsusman 5y agoFox News is part of the media, conservatives cancel people too, and calling the Azov Battalion Nazis is not exactly controversial. They're pretty open about that. But mostly I'm wondering why it matters if they're taking a personal risk or not. How is that relevant to anything?
- Brotkrumen 5y agoCriticising the silent majority when they try not to be silent anymore with "youre not taking any risks, so stay silent" is a bad take.
- gadders 5y agoI'm highlighting the emptiness of the moral grandstanding.
- shadowgovt 5y agoWe appear to have burned 393... Wait, 394... User comments on the subject. So if it's empty, so is commenting on HN, I'd extrapolate. Otherwise, it's gotten the attention of the sort of people who comment on HN, and that's something.
- Karrot_Kream 5y agoI think HN folks are commenting because: 1. These political threads always bring out the most ideologically strident folk 2. Developer time/experience is impacted by these changes. While I personally think these banners are fine and good to raise awareness, I do agree that there's a moral grandstanding element as well. I'm often puzzled why it's so controversial a belief to have. I don't see why folks are so annoyed at these banners though because I've been annoyed for years and years at crappy ASCII/figlet drawings that libraries/apps output that are garbled in my terminal's width/encoding and yet people still add those.