4 ms·

They are publicly "accusing" (or putting somebody in a very specific corner) two guys. FYI: This submission is just some images pulled off a thread of idle spe

by GHFigs 13y ago

They are publicly "accusing" (or putting somebody in a very specific corner) two guys. FYI: This submission is just some images pulled off a thread of idle speculation that somebody posted to Tumblr. It's not some kind of organized campaign claiming to have found the people responsible.

jotaass 13y ago
Yes, but now is on the front page of Hacker News. They may just have ruined this guy's life, even if they didn't mean it. And based on what? The pictures prove nothing. In fact, they're not even suspicious! "Backpack seems to be missing"? The picture only shows his head! This is bad, and very wrong.
- GHFigs 13y ago
  Oh, please. It's on the front page of Hacker News because Hacker News is full of credulous idiots, not because talking about pictures is bad or wrong.
  - mistercow 13y ago
    Almost every top level comment is people being skeptical and urging caution. What were you saying about credulous idiots?
    - scarmig 13y ago
      Well, someone's upvoting, and I'm guessing it isn't the cautious skeptics.
      - mistercow 13y ago
        Upvoting doesn't necessarily mean that you think that these are the guys responsible. It just means you think this is interesting. And it is.
    - GHFigs 13y ago
      Said comments are completely non-skeptical about the provenance of the images or their actual significance. Because Hacker News never gets anything wrong, right? We're smart here, right? No, actually. We average out to the same kind of mob-prone mooks we like to tut-tut at others for being. Except our mobs are about standing around going "Well, actually..." and that's marginally less puerile than what we see from 4chan mobs. It might feel like skepticism, but from where I sit it looks a lot like pretentious pseudo-intellectual grandstanding. It's like hanging a somebody's napkin doodle in an art gallery just so you can complain that it's not the Mona Lisa.
danielweber 13y ago
If someone thinks they have good evidence of the bomber, they should: 1. assemble the pictures 2. give sources for their pictures (an imgur link doesn't count) 3. show what evidence they think that makes the person a suspect 4. submit it to the FBI 5. not post it on the Internet Posting it on the Internet doesn't help. The FBI will need to track down original photos, and being duplicated everywhere on the web, with a bunch of other people photoshopping comments on it in various ways, won't help their efforts. The FBI only needs to see it once. This isn't voting. A bunch of people submitting something doesn't make it more likely to be true, or more likely to be listened to. On another note, it's funny how people tend to focus on people who stand out, like the guy with the white baseball cap. He stands out in a sea of dark colors, so of course people focus on him. It's very hard to believe (although possible) that the actual bomber would wear clothing that makes him stand out in any way.

by GHFigs 13y ago

jotaass 13y ago

Yes, but now is on the front page of Hacker News. They may just have ruined this guy's life, even if they didn't mean it. And based on what? The pictures prove nothing. In fact, they're not even suspicious! "Backpack seems to be missing"? The picture only shows his head! This is bad, and very wrong.

GHFigs 13y ago
Oh, please. It's on the front page of Hacker News because Hacker News is full of credulous idiots, not because talking about pictures is bad or wrong.
- mistercow 13y ago
  Almost every top level comment is people being skeptical and urging caution. What were you saying about credulous idiots?
  - scarmig 13y ago
    Well, someone's upvoting, and I'm guessing it isn't the cautious skeptics.
    - mistercow 13y ago
      Upvoting doesn't necessarily mean that you think that these are the guys responsible. It just means you think this is interesting. And it is.
  - GHFigs 13y ago
    Said comments are completely non-skeptical about the provenance of the images or their actual significance. Because Hacker News never gets anything wrong, right? We're smart here, right? No, actually. We average out to the same kind of mob-prone mooks we like to tut-tut at others for being. Except our mobs are about standing around going "Well, actually..." and that's marginally less puerile than what we see from 4chan mobs. It might feel like skepticism, but from where I sit it looks a lot like pretentious pseudo-intellectual grandstanding. It's like hanging a somebody's napkin doodle in an art gallery just so you can complain that it's not the Mona Lisa.

danielweber 13y ago

If someone thinks they have good evidence of the bomber, they should: 1. assemble the pictures 2. give sources for their pictures (an imgur link doesn't count) 3. show what evidence they think that makes the person a suspect 4. submit it to the FBI 5. not post it on the Internet Posting it on the Internet doesn't help. The FBI will need to track down original photos, and being duplicated everywhere on the web, with a bunch of other people photoshopping comments on it in various ways, won't help their efforts. The FBI only needs to see it once. This isn't voting. A bunch of people submitting something doesn't make it more likely to be true, or more likely to be listened to. On another note, it's funny how people tend to focus on people who stand out, like the guy with the white baseball cap. He stands out in a sea of dark colors, so of course people focus on him. It's very hard to believe (although possible) that the actual bomber would wear clothing that makes him stand out in any way.