5 ms·

NO Please, I read Hacker News for intelligent discourse, away from Reddit-type nonsense. There is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that the NSA hacked the Syrian core r

NO Please, I read Hacker News for intelligent discourse, away from Reddit-type nonsense. There is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that the NSA hacked the Syrian core router. Snowden was passing on office gossip which he heard. Why isn't that fact mentioned? Because it doesn't suit the cultural narrative?

jsmthrowaway 12y ago
As a user of both Reddit and HN, I have much more fulfilling conversations on Reddit in some areas, more fulfilling conversations on HN in some areas. In general, however, Reddit is typically a far more positive experience. The proof is in the pudding, right here: you've haughtily stated that HN is more intelligent, and come now, how is that even remotely an intelligent thing to say? I contribute to Reddit on a daily basis and generally it's an improvement to my day, such as organizing something worthwhile, learning something, or sharing knowledge with an eager listener. Whenever I contribute here, I generally end up in a bad mood because it's just a quest to be more right than someone else. My comments are far more spaced out here. Yesterday on Reddit we had a nice, enriched conversation about BGP with loads of young people learning things due to the routing table issue[1], including a comment on which $20 was spent to say "thank you." When's the last time a bunch of teenagers developed an interest in network engineering based upon a comment thread on Hacker News? Exactly. They're more likely to get better at arguing about minutiae here. The real difference between HN and Reddit is that on Hacker News, you are not discouraged from downvoting opinions with which you disagree. I recall pg saying he considered that fine. Combined with graying out of comments almost immediately, with the first downvote, this means groupthink is basically encouraged. Even though most folks disregard Reddiquette, it is clearly stated that you shouldn't downvote opinions simply because you don't like them, and should instead take contributing to the discussion into account. I've found in some of the smaller, tighter-knit communities, discussion is extremely healthy, respectful, and accommodating to all sides. I don't even bother on gender in tech threads here, but I've soaked days into them on Reddit, learning from my peers and comparing notes. This has been going on for ages, "oh, no, HN is turning into Reddit," you should be so lucky to be as positive as several of those communities. It's a tired meme. I come to HN to read valley opinions without Reddit slapping, so can I get my wish if you get yours? Just forget Reddit exists if it bothers you so much. --- Now, then, that off my chest: As for your point, at this point, Snowden has no motivation to lie. The article says he was told by an intelligence officer. This could have been a briefing and he might have further knowledge of the operation, or it might have been watercooler, we don't know, but the context of the revelation was indeed disclosed by the article's author. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/2dcol3/the_internet_hit_512k_bgp_routes_today_causing/cjo90mo http://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/2dcol3/the_interne...
- Dolimiter 12y ago
  What confuses me is that you agree with my point, that there is no evidence whatsoever for the Syrian allegation, it is heresay. So why don't you also complain that everyone is discussing it as fact?
  - alsetmusic 12y ago
    Can't speak for anyone else, but I haven't been given any solid reasons to discredit things Snowden has brought to light, except by parties whose best interest is to undercut him. He may have got things wrong on a small or large scale and could have deliberately falsified information, but the evidence to suggest this is currently lacking. The NSA, on the other hand, has been shown to operate with questionable ethics repeatedly. For the moment, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt over them.
    - Dolimiter 12y ago
      Wait what? Snowden himself says that the source of the information was office gossip. This isn't a case of believing or not believing Snowden. It's a case of people taking a snippet of gossip and reporting it as true because they want it to be true! People's reality distortion field when faced with the Snowden topic - it astonishes me.
  - jsmthrowaway 12y ago
    I would second alsetmusic. The veracity of ES as a source hasn't faltered since Day 1. Plus, why lie now?
    - Dolimiter 12y ago
      It was Snowden himself who said is was office gossip. The only people reporting it as fact are those caught in the Snowden reality distortion field.
      - tripzilch 12y ago

jsmthrowaway 12y ago

As a user of both Reddit and HN, I have much more fulfilling conversations on Reddit in some areas, more fulfilling conversations on HN in some areas. In general, however, Reddit is typically a far more positive experience. The proof is in the pudding, right here: you've haughtily stated that HN is more intelligent, and come now, how is that even remotely an intelligent thing to say? I contribute to Reddit on a daily basis and generally it's an improvement to my day, such as organizing something worthwhile, learning something, or sharing knowledge with an eager listener. Whenever I contribute here, I generally end up in a bad mood because it's just a quest to be more right than someone else. My comments are far more spaced out here. Yesterday on Reddit we had a nice, enriched conversation about BGP with loads of young people learning things due to the routing table issue[1], including a comment on which $20 was spent to say "thank you." When's the last time a bunch of teenagers developed an interest in network engineering based upon a comment thread on Hacker News? Exactly. They're more likely to get better at arguing about minutiae here. The real difference between HN and Reddit is that on Hacker News, you are not discouraged from downvoting opinions with which you disagree. I recall pg saying he considered that fine. Combined with graying out of comments almost immediately, with the first downvote, this means groupthink is basically encouraged. Even though most folks disregard Reddiquette, it is clearly stated that you shouldn't downvote opinions simply because you don't like them, and should instead take contributing to the discussion into account. I've found in some of the smaller, tighter-knit communities, discussion is extremely healthy, respectful, and accommodating to all sides. I don't even bother on gender in tech threads here, but I've soaked days into them on Reddit, learning from my peers and comparing notes. This has been going on for ages, "oh, no, HN is turning into Reddit," you should be so lucky to be as positive as several of those communities. It's a tired meme. I come to HN to read valley opinions without Reddit slapping, so can I get my wish if you get yours? Just forget Reddit exists if it bothers you so much. --- Now, then, that off my chest: As for your point, at this point, Snowden has no motivation to lie. The article says he was told by an intelligence officer. This could have been a briefing and he might have further knowledge of the operation, or it might have been watercooler, we don't know, but the context of the revelation was indeed disclosed by the article's author. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/2dcol3/the_internet_hit_512k_bgp_routes_today_causing/cjo90mo http://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/2dcol3/the_interne...

Dolimiter 12y ago
What confuses me is that you agree with my point, that there is no evidence whatsoever for the Syrian allegation, it is heresay. So why don't you also complain that everyone is discussing it as fact?
- alsetmusic 12y ago
  Can't speak for anyone else, but I haven't been given any solid reasons to discredit things Snowden has brought to light, except by parties whose best interest is to undercut him. He may have got things wrong on a small or large scale and could have deliberately falsified information, but the evidence to suggest this is currently lacking. The NSA, on the other hand, has been shown to operate with questionable ethics repeatedly. For the moment, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt over them.
  - Dolimiter 12y ago
    Wait what? Snowden himself says that the source of the information was office gossip. This isn't a case of believing or not believing Snowden. It's a case of people taking a snippet of gossip and reporting it as true because they want it to be true! People's reality distortion field when faced with the Snowden topic - it astonishes me.
- jsmthrowaway 12y ago
  I would second alsetmusic. The veracity of ES as a source hasn't faltered since Day 1. Plus, why lie now?
  - Dolimiter 12y ago
    It was Snowden himself who said is was office gossip. The only people reporting it as fact are those caught in the Snowden reality distortion field.
    - tripzilch 12y ago