Hacker News Reader

Comment by giglamesh | Hacker News Reader

I fail to see how "And a new proposal to create an app designed to stop police killings." fits on the list of problems that don't need to be solved. Am I missing something?

View on HN

I think it's meant to highlight the absurdity of believing that police killings can be fixed by an app.

I think that the spread of phones with video recorders is a huge part of why police killings get more attention in 2016 than they did in 2006. In at least one case a woman live streamed a police killing, defeating later attempts to suppress the video. If the name Rodney King means anything to you it's because someone happened to have a video camera in the right place at the right time when they were rare. So it's hardly absurd to think that an app could help fight police killings.

My interpretation from the article is that app was included to emphasize just how many frivolous apps crossed her radar except for that particular one that was truly solving a meaningful problem.

Maybe it's a rhetorical failure then? I feel like to get that reading requires you to assume a lot about the emphasis placed on the word "And".

Although I would argue that it's worth asking whether or not that's a problem best addressed by means of an app. I'm not going to presume that that's why the author included it in the list, but it does seem a worthy question nonetheless.

Responding to the point you're trying to make: How big of a problem are police killings--really?

We all understand the act of (unjustified) police killings is a bad one, but how much of a _problem_ is it? Look at the evidence.

Then look at all of the other problems that we all face, not just in the states, but worldwide. I can name a great problem that almost all of us should be focusing on: global warming. Why don't we spend our energy on a significant and catastrophic problem?

We need to prioritize. Anyone who tries to up or downplay something as a problem to you might have their own agenda, or have bought into someone else's agenda. Don't just believe me. Look for the evidence.

> Why don't we spend our energy on a significant and catastrophic problem?

It's possible to do this without ignoring other issues.

Not according to this article, apparently.

Reminder: The downvote button isn't to show disagreement.

There are definitely ways this _could_ make sense in the context of the article but you're right that without proper explanation is seems at best heartless and at worst pretty racist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com