I feel that the article does a good job of lauding the position for low entry, but it lacks an absolute perspective. For example, today email is generally view

I feel that the article does a good job of lauding the position for low entry, but it lacks an absolute perspective. For example, today email is generally viewed by people as a double edged sword because of the ease of entry for people sending. People sometimes still view Wikipedia with scepticism because of the low cost of entry to add your personal views to the system. Chat roulette, which was a great idea, became a haven for people who wanted to expose themselves. All three cases are situations where a low barrier of entry has either taken a army of content curators (either software or human) or driven the service into obscurity. How does this solve the issue of either making ngrok a double edged sword or something that the general public will be warned about in a 20 second context-less news blurb?