Hacker News Reader

Comment by berberous | Hacker News Reader

And who decides which information is beneficial, useful or constructive? What makes you think you are on the right side?

By the way, I note that you have been downvoted/flagged to oblivion. I only see your comment because I prefer to browse with 'showdead' enabled. So, you presumably post here because you like this forum, yet your peers think your comment was not worth anyone even _viewing_.

I think your comment was a coherent, good faith attempt to express a view. While I disagree with your view, I'd prefer people debate it with you rather than flag it away.

But how do you feel knowing that your view has been deemed to be net negative and harmful enough that no one should even view it?

View on HN

It's not about what information is useful. It's controlling what information is bad/can be abused.

How do I feel about my comment being flagged? It's totally expected. This is a heavy technolibertarian site.

The idea that "things will just sort themselves out" in any field can never be questioned. Saying that maybe things should be a little bit controlled is always met with extreme cult like fervor. The current effects of status quo paradigms are never taken into consideration.

And because of this the term "free speech" has become a thought terminating cliche.

You apparently can't ever know what's right or wrong, or say what's good or bad.

What a terrible way to think.

Do you see the irony in your first sentence? Your concern about information isn't about it being useful but about it can be bad/abuseable? What you decry in "technolibertarians" you are for with censorship.

The same logic applies to both of them except information is a way more useful tool with less potential for abuse and has censorship has proven full of more bads. You complain of status quos and norms not being taken into consideration yet never think of the downsides of your "careful" approach which is actually recklessness driven by fear.

You can always attempt to validate claims that you hear that may be false. There is nothing that can be done to claims not heard and spread. And that is one hell of a camel's nose under the tent.

Abuse is all about the wielder anyway. To give up potential and put oneself in the position of much worse abusers because of "bad people might abuse it".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com