4 ms·

What? Everyone on HN works for someone. I am not my company. Google has plenty of views i don't agree with, and I have plenty of views they don't agree with.

What? Everyone on HN works for someone. I am not my company. Google has plenty of views i don't agree with, and I have plenty of views they don't agree with. If you believe comments on HN (or almost anywhere else) should have conflict of interest disclosures, you may as well shut it all down. Everything here is opinions of people, presented as opinions of people.

Karunamon 12y ago
It's really not that hard to understand that someone making comments about a company they are paid by should call that out.
- tptacek 12y ago
  It is extremely hard to take this moralizing seriously when the only reason he's taking this flak is that he's actually signed his name to his comments and been forthcoming on the site about where he works. That's not something you can say about every opinionated HN commenter.
  - dang 12y ago
    I agree. And intolerable to take when the provocation comes from an accomplished if not professional astroturfer who has plagued this site for years using dozens of accounts.
wfjackson 12y ago
The problem is that you're unwilling to apply that same logic to Ben Edelman and pretty much call him a paid shill. At least the commenter you were replying to noted the potential conflict of interest, unlike you.
- DannyBee 12y ago
  Because it's not the same? Ben publishes pieces in newspapers, journals, and testimony, and pretends they are objective while being paid by companies to write them. If you think this is the same as me or anyone else commenting on HN about their personal opinions, i'm not sure what to tell you. When I start submitting congressional testimony on behalf of google, and we start talking about it on HN, i'll happily note that i wrote it. (In the same way when we talked about Google code.google.com, i happily noted i worked on it)
  - gress 12y ago
    Are you saying that HN is less influential than newspapers and journals? Are you pretending to be unaffected by the incentives you have to defend Google?
    - tptacek 12y ago
      If you're going to impugn someone else's integrity, could you perhaps sign your name to the comment? I have no idea who you are. I'm just going to assume you work for Alibaba, or Vk.
      - gress 12y ago
        Surely you can't be this blind to the power imbalance. A Googler defending Google on HN has the backing of one of the most powerful corporations in the industry, and no risk to his future career. Calling out this bias or even being critical of the Google carries potentially huge career risk. Anonymity is a necessity if unpopular opinions are to be heard. And by all means assume I work for a competitor (which I do not) - that doesn't change the fact that DannyBee is incentivized to support Google and yet tries to distinct himself from this truth.
        tptacek 12y ago
        Anonymity is vitally important to civic discourse, which is why it's so galling when it's recklessly abused for cowardly and pointless drive-by character assassination. But that's what I'd expect to see from a secret shill for Yahoo.
        gress 12y ago
        There is no character assassination going on here. I'm simply pointing out the incentives. Bear in mind that DannyBee is also engaging in what you call 'character assasination' on the same basis. You, on the other hand, are now name calling, denying the power imbalance I mentioned, and accusing me of lying. Why do you feel the need to put so much emotional energy into defending DannyBee, who seems quite capable of defending himself? You seem to have clearly deviated from what you call 'civic discourse' - why have you chosen to do that? Does it seem justified by my comment? If you think so, then ask yourself why it is acceptable for you to break from 'civic discourse', and yet it is not justified for me to do so, as you claim I have. Do you think your opinion is more right, or more likely to receive support?
vdaniuk 12y ago
I would certainly be not against some external entity or random event shutting HN down. That would lead to genesis of new communities and contribute to spreading the influence to several or dozens of separate entities. Ironically, voice of the hackers, the independents, the non-affiliated is weak here. The voice of the tech establishment, the VCs, the startups, the megacorps is heard loud and clear. Do you not see how HN is crucial for YC continued success as the VC company? YC doesn't have to censor anything, the increased presence of YC alumni defines the narrative. I do not believe that it is healthy for most important tech community on the open internet to be so strongly influenced by one VC company. Disclosures would help a little bit. edit I don't mind the downvotes :)
- tptacek 12y ago
  Charming. The "external entity or random event" part of that comment is what really sold it. You're all class.
  - vdaniuk 12y ago
    Yeah, because surely YC would give up one of their most important generators of competitive advantage willingly. Also, ofc, with you being one of the top HN members would not support that. I don't have any personal benefit from any outcome, but you do. Who is all class now? edit: I am curious, in what way, shape or form "external entity or random event" part of my comment is related to either presence or lack of my class? Care to elaborate?
    - tptacek 12y ago
      It'll be amusing to watch you try to build an intellectually coherent narrative out of (a) insulting strangers for supposed conflicts of interest, as if it was possible to do that without directly questioning their integrity, and (b) openly suggesting that coercive force be used to shut down a forum that happens to host arguments you don't agree with.
      - vdaniuk 12y ago
teekert 12y ago
Indeed! Who cares about conflict of interest in a discussion thread? Your point is either valid or not, intelligent or not, it will persuade me or not. I don't need to know your entire background to see value, insights or lies in your remarks.

Karunamon 12y ago

It's really not that hard to understand that someone making comments about a company they are paid by should call that out.

tptacek 12y ago
It is extremely hard to take this moralizing seriously when the only reason he's taking this flak is that he's actually signed his name to his comments and been forthcoming on the site about where he works. That's not something you can say about every opinionated HN commenter.
- dang 12y ago
  I agree. And intolerable to take when the provocation comes from an accomplished if not professional astroturfer who has plagued this site for years using dozens of accounts.

wfjackson 12y ago

The problem is that you're unwilling to apply that same logic to Ben Edelman and pretty much call him a paid shill. At least the commenter you were replying to noted the potential conflict of interest, unlike you.

DannyBee 12y ago
Because it's not the same? Ben publishes pieces in newspapers, journals, and testimony, and pretends they are objective while being paid by companies to write them. If you think this is the same as me or anyone else commenting on HN about their personal opinions, i'm not sure what to tell you. When I start submitting congressional testimony on behalf of google, and we start talking about it on HN, i'll happily note that i wrote it. (In the same way when we talked about Google code.google.com, i happily noted i worked on it)
- gress 12y ago
  Are you saying that HN is less influential than newspapers and journals? Are you pretending to be unaffected by the incentives you have to defend Google?
  - tptacek 12y ago
    If you're going to impugn someone else's integrity, could you perhaps sign your name to the comment? I have no idea who you are. I'm just going to assume you work for Alibaba, or Vk.
    - gress 12y ago
      Surely you can't be this blind to the power imbalance. A Googler defending Google on HN has the backing of one of the most powerful corporations in the industry, and no risk to his future career. Calling out this bias or even being critical of the Google carries potentially huge career risk. Anonymity is a necessity if unpopular opinions are to be heard. And by all means assume I work for a competitor (which I do not) - that doesn't change the fact that DannyBee is incentivized to support Google and yet tries to distinct himself from this truth.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        Anonymity is vitally important to civic discourse, which is why it's so galling when it's recklessly abused for cowardly and pointless drive-by character assassination. But that's what I'd expect to see from a secret shill for Yahoo.
        gress 12y ago
        There is no character assassination going on here. I'm simply pointing out the incentives. Bear in mind that DannyBee is also engaging in what you call 'character assasination' on the same basis. You, on the other hand, are now name calling, denying the power imbalance I mentioned, and accusing me of lying. Why do you feel the need to put so much emotional energy into defending DannyBee, who seems quite capable of defending himself? You seem to have clearly deviated from what you call 'civic discourse' - why have you chosen to do that? Does it seem justified by my comment? If you think so, then ask yourself why it is acceptable for you to break from 'civic discourse', and yet it is not justified for me to do so, as you claim I have. Do you think your opinion is more right, or more likely to receive support?

vdaniuk 12y ago

I would certainly be not against some external entity or random event shutting HN down. That would lead to genesis of new communities and contribute to spreading the influence to several or dozens of separate entities. Ironically, voice of the hackers, the independents, the non-affiliated is weak here. The voice of the tech establishment, the VCs, the startups, the megacorps is heard loud and clear. Do you not see how HN is crucial for YC continued success as the VC company? YC doesn't have to censor anything, the increased presence of YC alumni defines the narrative. I do not believe that it is healthy for most important tech community on the open internet to be so strongly influenced by one VC company. Disclosures would help a little bit. edit I don't mind the downvotes :)

tptacek 12y ago
Charming. The "external entity or random event" part of that comment is what really sold it. You're all class.
- vdaniuk 12y ago
  Yeah, because surely YC would give up one of their most important generators of competitive advantage willingly. Also, ofc, with you being one of the top HN members would not support that. I don't have any personal benefit from any outcome, but you do. Who is all class now? edit: I am curious, in what way, shape or form "external entity or random event" part of my comment is related to either presence or lack of my class? Care to elaborate?
  - tptacek 12y ago
    It'll be amusing to watch you try to build an intellectually coherent narrative out of (a) insulting strangers for supposed conflicts of interest, as if it was possible to do that without directly questioning their integrity, and (b) openly suggesting that coercive force be used to shut down a forum that happens to host arguments you don't agree with.
    - vdaniuk 12y ago

teekert 12y ago

Indeed! Who cares about conflict of interest in a discussion thread? Your point is either valid or not, intelligent or not, it will persuade me or not. I don't need to know your entire background to see value, insights or lies in your remarks.