Hacker News Reader

Comment by qiqitori | Hacker News Reader

The EFF doesn't need to give "the other side" because the other side is mostly obvious to the target audience (which isn't random people, Google itself is a huge part of the target audience). Note that Google doesn't give the other side either. Also, nothing in politics works like that, if you want to get people to join your cause you don't end everything you say with "But keep in mind that $foo".

View on HN

Still not giving the other side and using "dangerous" and other "think of the children" terms triggers my bullshit and what are you hiding detector. And the only thing vouching for them is their reputation.

Speaking of reputation EFF has been doing this shady speak for last few years and my respect for them is quite diminished. I suppose they can still do it because they have practicality a monopoly to "protect privacy online" with Apple being a distant second player.

> monopoly to "protect privacy online" with Apple being a distant second player

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29506994

I used to donate to the EFF on a recurring basis but there behavior over the last few years brought that to an end last year.

I still donate to the EFF.

What have they done this last year to change? Is there another organization you could recommended supporting?

So long as they're only interested in preaching to the choir, that's true. If they want to reach other people who are as zealous, they could stand to give a better full of the landscape.

Ugh, typo: Who are not as zealous.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com