28 ms·
I don’t think this belongs on HN. There isn’t a compelling technical angle and there are plenty of other venues to discuss politics.
by hippo22 9mo ago
I don’t think this belongs on HN. There isn’t a compelling technical angle and there are plenty of other venues to discuss politics.
- acdha 9mo agoThe technical angle which is most of interest to me are building systems which preserve evidence. For example, how do you build a cloud sync service which prevents someone other than the owner of the phone from deleting videos without the owner’s consent (or in ways which allow them to regain access after being released) while still allowing people to delete things they might not want a hostile government to see. There are no silver bullets here but some really interesting trade offs.
- hippo22 9mo agoNone of that is present in the article, however, which essentially consists of a restatement of the headline. This post is essentially engagement bait.
- happytoexplain 9mo agoThere is a line across which happenings are universally relevant, and we have crossed it. This is especially important on platforms that are ostensibly enlightened. There are borderline zero viable platforms for political discourse. Do not try to censor discourse here.
- hippo22 9mo agoTry Reddit. You’ll see this exact topic discussed nearly indefinitely.
- happytoexplain 9mo agoI'm not interested in their discourse. Topics != community. But that's obvious - there's no reason to ignore that fact unless you're trying to insult somebody for petty reasons.
- hippo22 9mo ago[flagged]
- happytoexplain 9mo agoWhy write like this on HN? It's the antithesis of its culture. Ironically, you're telling people to go somewhere else, which is itself an attitude that belongs in those other places.
- hippo22 9mo agoMy point is that there are plenty of other places to discuss this topic, e.g. Reddit and Facebook. The reason you don’t like those venues is because they produce conversation of the lowest common denominator. What you don’t realize is that’s really the only type of conversation you can have on this topic. So, by advocating for this topic on HN, you are brining those aspects of Facebook and Reddit which you dislike here.
- happytoexplain 9mo agoYou're wrong. I've had many valuable conversations on wedge topics on HN. (I'm not at the moment, which is unusual)
- direwolf20 9mo agoReddit doesn't allow discussion. Reddit threads are restatement of the opinions of the subreddit moderators. Any other comments are removed.
- elpocko 9mo agoYou click 'flag' and move on. It's not worth it.
- jemmyw 9mo agowhy even do that? just leave it for people who want this discussion. enough voted it up to get on the home page.
- elpocko 8mo agoBecause there is no other way to effectively say "I'm not interested in this kind of content". You say it in the comments, you get punished. There is no downvoting posts, flagging is the only thing that has an effect.
- krapp 9mo agoHacker News doesn't require a compelling technical angle. This is a civil discussion, no flamewar, and yet it still gets flagged.
- hn_acker 9mo agoI did not post this article on account of a technical angle or lack thereof. I posted it because I believe the judge's order is a practical necessity in this situation, and to the extent that it is a practical necessity is an "interesting new phenomenon". The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) sought such a temporary restraining order this time because the BCA learned from the last time the federal government blocked the BCA from investigating a killing by ICE [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Ren%C3%A9e_Good#Investigations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Ren%C3%A9e_Good#Inv...