4 ms·
Looking at that, I'd suggest the downvotes are from being technically wrong (the “Scanning for vulnerabilities won't help you find critics. If you wanted to loo
by dspillett 4y ago
Looking at that, I'd suggest the downvotes are from being technically wrong (the “Scanning for vulnerabilities won't help you find critics. If you wanted to look for critics, you would scan for critics.” argument – there are better/easier ways to achieve what you are talking about a government trying to achieve so why would they go to that effort?). Maybe some considered the comment concerning India on a thread about the UK was pulling things off-topic, though as not all voters replied with clarifying comments we'll never know.
The lying/agenda thing seems to just be one comment. Try not to assume that one angry reply represents a larger chunk of HN's readership. The Internet is full of bus-stop boxers, it is best to not let them wind you up overly.
- 2Gkashmiri 4y agooh no, not that. >Try not to assume that one angry reply represents a larger chunk of HN's readership. you get to have a thick skin when you are on an anonymous public platform. i accept that.... i live in a place where i have to actually assume malice on part of the government because the government "is" hostile against me. Again, this isn't some tin-foil conspiracy but as you might've guessed from my handle, its yeah... So that comment earlier and the current article about ISPs tracking users, this is primarily to catch critics and dissenters.
- dspillett 4y ago> So that comment earlier [was that] this is primarily to catch critics and dissenters. I was suggesting that the downvotes there, complained about above, where people disagreeing with this possibility, on the basis that it would not offer a practical amount of extra information (considering the effort involved) than already being gleaned with other methods they are already using. Not generally how downvotes should be used IMO, but it happens.