3 ms·
> "Both of the posts indirectly imply that complying with this specific pen register order would have been evil on the hitler/mlkjr scale" That is an implicati
by jlgreco 13y ago
> "Both of the posts indirectly imply that complying with this specific pen register order would have been evil on the hitler/mlkjr scale"
That is an implication you invented. The person who quoted MLK has in fact already very explicitly and painfully clearly stated that he thinks no such thing[1]. If you continue to think that he was implying that, then you are the one that's got an issue.
This "mock offense at historical allusions" shit has no place on HN. It is transparent as hell and does nothing but gum up the discussion.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6486091 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6486091
- thrownaway2424 13y agoYeah, but he didn't clarify what he actually meant by invoking the MLK quote. As I said, it was a disposable invocation of a historical quote. I've read every comment in this thread and I don't see anybody making even a semi-cogent argument about how due process was violated in this case. Remember, the US Constitution does not guarantee your privacy. It guarantees that you won't be deprived of it without due process of law. That process appears to have been followed here, by the government at least. People like the Lavabit founder who refuse to comply with the results of due process are as guilty of undermining our system of laws as any corrupt law enforcement agency.
- jlgreco 13y agoHe could not have possibly given you a more exact and clear response to your request for clarification. I was previously giving you the benefit of the doubt and leaving myself open to the possibility that you simply had not seen it (since it is technically in response to himself) but if you really did read his response, then continued to misrepresent his comment that way, then you are doing nothing but shitposting.