6 ms·

The subject is vast. The subject is technical. The subject is on-topic. Beyond all that, the subject rises to a level of fundamental importance to a degree few

by deveac 13y ago

The subject is vast. The subject is technical. The subject is on-topic. Beyond all that, the subject rises to a level of fundamental importance to a degree few others do. Certainly more than 99% of topics that find their way to the front page of HN (feel free to quibble with that percentage). I've said it before on here. I don't think the conversation on this issue has gotten loud enough, or lasted long enough, and HN is one of the few communities on the net where it is not only happening, but happening with a greater degree of insight, acumen, and creativity with regards to solutions and future actions. I say carry on, upvote, comment, and ignore those unconcerned people with short attention spans. Edit: And most importantly for the Americans here, call your representatives and tell them, in your own voice, exactly what you think. This has to happen at a minimum.

npsimons 13y ago
As someone who has fled (multiple!) other online communities due to them emphasizing things which truly do not matter (eg, a minor update to a product that was never all that revolutionary to begin with), I can only commend attitudes like this. Of course, perspective being what it is (ie, the horizon of most people being effectively zero), I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at the status quo.
sev 13y ago
I agree. The general public does not know much as much as they should about this topic, and the tech scene needs to be saturated before the information can spill out vastly enough into the general public. And there is a fundamental issue that's important to continue discussing, and that is all the logical answers to potential questions that the general public may have that even we don't have precise, logical, and unarguable answers to...such as "I don't have anything to hide, so why do I care if they're spying on me?"
- kamjam 13y ago
  Without a SOPA style blackout campaign by the major players, the message will never reach the masses, which is unfortunate. But this time the major players are not only in bed with the government, they've been caught with their pants down.
- threeseed 13y ago
  The general public knows as much as they want to know about the topic. And wake up and smell the coffee here. Nobody cares what you, me or the rest of the "tech scene" thinks about politics. It's the pathetic arrogance of people in the "tech scene" who walk around acting like they are the only enlightened ones and they are somehow uniquely qualified to educate people on the subject.
  - jlgreco 13y ago
    See, that makes some sense to me. On the other hand, rayiner's constant calls to people in tech to stop being apathetic or even hostile to politics and actually flex the muscles our economical standing affords us makes more sense to me. Tech is huge, but we have less influence than special interests groups that represent far smaller industries (Apple alone nearly has enough cash to swallow the US music industry). That sure as hell isn't because we've been trying to hard.
    - threeseed 13y ago
      I am sorry but nobody cares what a bunch of computer nerds thinks about politics. And remind me again why they should ? What because there is money in technology ? Great. Next time I am looking for help fixing my car I will ask a florist.
      - jlgreco 13y ago
        > "I am sorry but nobody cares what a bunch of computer nerds thinks about politics." Currently? You're right, they don't. That is the problem. A problem that is not solved by saying "shut-up about politics and go back to your programming caves you nerds." Why is it important that they care? Well, here is rayiner's comment that I am thinking of: ""Wahh wahh we're too busy running a business to make our voice heard in Congress, wahh wahh." The cost of a successful lobbying presence is measured in the tens of millions of dollars a year, which is chump change for an industry as big and influential as the tech industry. Heck, construction companies have a much more organized and effective lobby, and they basically make no money at all (see the article on the front page about their 1% margins). Really, it's not that much money. Raise it on Kickstarter or whatever. There is a bizarre mental block/persecution complex/"I'm going to take my balls and go home" phenomenon at play in the tech industry that's makes no sense to me. Silicon Valley isn't a special snowflake and Congress isn't going to divine its needs and tend to them. You've got one side telling Congress that absolutely everything needs to be patentable to keep the Chinese from stealing all our technology, and nothing but deafening silence in response. What exactly do you expect to happen in that circumstance?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5935469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5935469
diminoten 13y ago
If the subject is not technical, it should be removed/flagged. I'm immensely interested in the specifics of which algorithms the NSA has cracked and how, but I'm absolutely not interested in what Obama or Snowden has to say on the topic. They're completely irrelevant, and the ensuing discussion is decidedly not a technical one. That's how this should be decided - would/does the ensuing conversation stick to the technical or entrepreneurial aspects of this submission? In particular, does the discussion devolve into an, "Everybody's got a valid opinion" kind of discussion? If so, drop it, and drop it fast. [0] There's this mistaken notion that, just because a person works with computers for a living, or owns a computer related business, that their opinion on ANY political topic related to computers is a valid or even privileged one, when that's absolutely and demonstrably false. This crowd is a technical crowd, not a politically savvy crowd. People talking out of their wheelhouses should not be promoted. Edit: [0] - http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html Wanted to cite where I got this idea. This essay informs heavily on what I believe HN should be about.
- deveac 13y ago
  >If the subject is not technical, it should be removed/flagged. Incorrect. See the HN FAQ. Political discussions are allowed (saying only that most are discouraged implies that certain ones are. If there ever was one, this is it).
  - diminoten 13y ago
    It's not incorrect that I feel that way about this specific story, which is the question being asked.
    - deveac 13y ago
      Of course you can feel any way you wish, but please realize that per the first line of the HN FAQ, this is on topic, and your assertion that valid topics you don't wish to see should be flagged is an abuse of the feature and rules of the site. I hope you can see the distinction.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
jack-r-abbit 13y ago
ignore those unconcerned people with short attention spans This is what I would like to see less of... the pointless name calling. Saying this is no better than someone else saying "ignore those paranoid people with tinfoil hats." Not everyone is at DEFCON 1 over this. Some people are just as informed/intelligent as the others yet make the decision that they are not concerned (or just less concerned). It doesn't mean they are simpletons with short attention spans.
- deveac 13y ago
  Good point. I think "ignore those unconcerned people and those with short attention spans" would have been a better way to phrase it.
timr 13y ago
The subject is vast, and it is occasionally technical, but most of the discussion on HN is Frist Post and Natalie Portman/Hot Grits with a veil of legitimacy. There's a population of maybe 50-100 people on here who are obsessed with the subject, and they're spamming every thread with off-topic NSA posts on the theory that they know better than everyone else what people should be talking about. It's no different than any other form of trolling, and it should be managed accordingly.
- sinak2 13y ago
  Interestingly, this post appears to have been flagged or relegated in some way. It has 141 points in one hour at 10th place, while the Steam Family Sharing post has 150 points in first place and is two hours old. Certainly some of the discussion on other threads should be filtered. But the moderation on stories themselves appears to be heavy-handed right now. Many significant new stories aren't making it to the home page (see above). A proposed solution: If the reason for this in fact flagging, and not moderation by admins, then perhaps showing the guidelines and possibly requiring users to give a reason for flagging might reduce the number of wayward flags. The official guidelines for flagging are: "If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link"
  - timr 13y ago
    HN has had a long-thread penalty (since well before the NSA scandal) to prevent flamewars from taking over. That's probably what's happening here.
    - sinak2 13y ago
      91 comments doesn't seem like that many, but that's definitely a possibility.
      - timr 13y ago
        I think there's a rate calculation. It wouldn't make sense to just arbitrarily penalize long threads. It's postings per unit time or somesuch.
sliverstorm 13y ago
I just wish it wasn't all over HN. There isn't enough real new information coming out to justify the quantity of linking and discussion that is going on here, so the community (to me at least) appears to be spinning its wheels and rehashing everything over and over. As someone who is not obsessed with the issue, that gets tiring. It also distracts from good technical discussion. For example, when the new iPhone was announced, instead of an interesting technical discussion of the merits and problems with biometric authentication we get "OMG the spooks are going to steal your fingerprint"
pdx 13y ago
I also hope that the discussion continues here. I see this community as being uniquely qualified and positioned to discuss the technical aspects of these issues. When knowledgeable people have a discussion in public about an important topic, there is opportunity to educate or be a resource to, people who have the power to effect change. Creating that opportunity is a good thing. The people who have the power or opportunity to effect change in the U.S. government are probably not here among us today, but they're a Google search away from finding the thoughts and opinions of a large collection of thoughtful and well educated technologists. I'm happier knowing that.

by deveac 13y ago

npsimons 13y ago

As someone who has fled (multiple!) other online communities due to them emphasizing things which truly do not matter (eg, a minor update to a product that was never all that revolutionary to begin with), I can only commend attitudes like this. Of course, perspective being what it is (ie, the horizon of most people being effectively zero), I suppose I shouldn't be surprised at the status quo.

sev 13y ago

I agree. The general public does not know much as much as they should about this topic, and the tech scene needs to be saturated before the information can spill out vastly enough into the general public. And there is a fundamental issue that's important to continue discussing, and that is all the logical answers to potential questions that the general public may have that even we don't have precise, logical, and unarguable answers to...such as "I don't have anything to hide, so why do I care if they're spying on me?"

kamjam 13y ago
Without a SOPA style blackout campaign by the major players, the message will never reach the masses, which is unfortunate. But this time the major players are not only in bed with the government, they've been caught with their pants down.
threeseed 13y ago
The general public knows as much as they want to know about the topic. And wake up and smell the coffee here. Nobody cares what you, me or the rest of the "tech scene" thinks about politics. It's the pathetic arrogance of people in the "tech scene" who walk around acting like they are the only enlightened ones and they are somehow uniquely qualified to educate people on the subject.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  See, that makes some sense to me. On the other hand, rayiner's constant calls to people in tech to stop being apathetic or even hostile to politics and actually flex the muscles our economical standing affords us makes more sense to me. Tech is huge, but we have less influence than special interests groups that represent far smaller industries (Apple alone nearly has enough cash to swallow the US music industry). That sure as hell isn't because we've been trying to hard.
  - threeseed 13y ago
    I am sorry but nobody cares what a bunch of computer nerds thinks about politics. And remind me again why they should ? What because there is money in technology ? Great. Next time I am looking for help fixing my car I will ask a florist.
    - jlgreco 13y ago
      > "I am sorry but nobody cares what a bunch of computer nerds thinks about politics." Currently? You're right, they don't. That is the problem. A problem that is not solved by saying "shut-up about politics and go back to your programming caves you nerds." Why is it important that they care? Well, here is rayiner's comment that I am thinking of: ""Wahh wahh we're too busy running a business to make our voice heard in Congress, wahh wahh." The cost of a successful lobbying presence is measured in the tens of millions of dollars a year, which is chump change for an industry as big and influential as the tech industry. Heck, construction companies have a much more organized and effective lobby, and they basically make no money at all (see the article on the front page about their 1% margins). Really, it's not that much money. Raise it on Kickstarter or whatever. There is a bizarre mental block/persecution complex/"I'm going to take my balls and go home" phenomenon at play in the tech industry that's makes no sense to me. Silicon Valley isn't a special snowflake and Congress isn't going to divine its needs and tend to them. You've got one side telling Congress that absolutely everything needs to be patentable to keep the Chinese from stealing all our technology, and nothing but deafening silence in response. What exactly do you expect to happen in that circumstance?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5935469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5935469

diminoten 13y ago

If the subject is not technical, it should be removed/flagged. I'm immensely interested in the specifics of which algorithms the NSA has cracked and how, but I'm absolutely not interested in what Obama or Snowden has to say on the topic. They're completely irrelevant, and the ensuing discussion is decidedly not a technical one. That's how this should be decided - would/does the ensuing conversation stick to the technical or entrepreneurial aspects of this submission? In particular, does the discussion devolve into an, "Everybody's got a valid opinion" kind of discussion? If so, drop it, and drop it fast. [0] There's this mistaken notion that, just because a person works with computers for a living, or owns a computer related business, that their opinion on ANY political topic related to computers is a valid or even privileged one, when that's absolutely and demonstrably false. This crowd is a technical crowd, not a politically savvy crowd. People talking out of their wheelhouses should not be promoted. Edit: [0] - http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html Wanted to cite where I got this idea. This essay informs heavily on what I believe HN should be about.

deveac 13y ago
>If the subject is not technical, it should be removed/flagged. Incorrect. See the HN FAQ. Political discussions are allowed (saying only that most are discouraged implies that certain ones are. If there ever was one, this is it).
- diminoten 13y ago
  It's not incorrect that I feel that way about this specific story, which is the question being asked.
  - deveac 13y ago
    Of course you can feel any way you wish, but please realize that per the first line of the HN FAQ, this is on topic, and your assertion that valid topics you don't wish to see should be flagged is an abuse of the feature and rules of the site. I hope you can see the distinction.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

jack-r-abbit 13y ago

ignore those unconcerned people with short attention spans This is what I would like to see less of... the pointless name calling. Saying this is no better than someone else saying "ignore those paranoid people with tinfoil hats." Not everyone is at DEFCON 1 over this. Some people are just as informed/intelligent as the others yet make the decision that they are not concerned (or just less concerned). It doesn't mean they are simpletons with short attention spans.

deveac 13y ago
Good point. I think "ignore those unconcerned people and those with short attention spans" would have been a better way to phrase it.

timr 13y ago

The subject is vast, and it is occasionally technical, but most of the discussion on HN is Frist Post and Natalie Portman/Hot Grits with a veil of legitimacy. There's a population of maybe 50-100 people on here who are obsessed with the subject, and they're spamming every thread with off-topic NSA posts on the theory that they know better than everyone else what people should be talking about. It's no different than any other form of trolling, and it should be managed accordingly.

sinak2 13y ago
Interestingly, this post appears to have been flagged or relegated in some way. It has 141 points in one hour at 10th place, while the Steam Family Sharing post has 150 points in first place and is two hours old. Certainly some of the discussion on other threads should be filtered. But the moderation on stories themselves appears to be heavy-handed right now. Many significant new stories aren't making it to the home page (see above). A proposed solution: If the reason for this in fact flagging, and not moderation by admins, then perhaps showing the guidelines and possibly requiring users to give a reason for flagging might reduce the number of wayward flags. The official guidelines for flagging are: "If you think something is spam or offtopic, flag it by going to its page and clicking on the "flag" link"
- timr 13y ago
  HN has had a long-thread penalty (since well before the NSA scandal) to prevent flamewars from taking over. That's probably what's happening here.
  - sinak2 13y ago
    91 comments doesn't seem like that many, but that's definitely a possibility.
    - timr 13y ago
      I think there's a rate calculation. It wouldn't make sense to just arbitrarily penalize long threads. It's postings per unit time or somesuch.

sliverstorm 13y ago

I just wish it wasn't all over HN. There isn't enough real new information coming out to justify the quantity of linking and discussion that is going on here, so the community (to me at least) appears to be spinning its wheels and rehashing everything over and over. As someone who is not obsessed with the issue, that gets tiring. It also distracts from good technical discussion. For example, when the new iPhone was announced, instead of an interesting technical discussion of the merits and problems with biometric authentication we get "OMG the spooks are going to steal your fingerprint"

pdx 13y ago

I also hope that the discussion continues here. I see this community as being uniquely qualified and positioned to discuss the technical aspects of these issues. When knowledgeable people have a discussion in public about an important topic, there is opportunity to educate or be a resource to, people who have the power to effect change. Creating that opportunity is a good thing. The people who have the power or opportunity to effect change in the U.S. government are probably not here among us today, but they're a Google search away from finding the thoughts and opinions of a large collection of thoughtful and well educated technologists. I'm happier knowing that.