Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I am one of those that share both sentiments so I am happy to explain.

It is better all software be democratized or decentralized which makes the responsibility to filter and ignore bad content fall on the individual or community who can maintain block lists all can override or can opt in or out of.

In a dictatorship or centralized technology however the responsibility falls to a central entity that removes all choice from you and even removes the ability to review the code they expect you to agree to run. Almost like making people sign legal agreements without reading them. By design a dictator implies they can and will always make better choices than anyone else. Dictators by design must be -perfect- to evade the due criticism for taking away free choice.

In a world run by software the method of governance for that software is of a similar level of importance as the governance of our countries.



  > the responsibility to filter and ignore bad content fall on the individual or community.
The individual and the community is exceptionally bad at this type of thing. Government may be as well, though.


Are you saying that everybody is or are you leaving out corporations because you thing that corporations are good at it?


I'm saying that people in general are bad at filtering and ignoring bad content. I have no experience with corporations doing it - I don't have a Facebook account - but I certainly am not pleased with the way journalistic bodies filter for content. I package them separately from general "corporations" because supposedly that would be their specialty. Rather, all I see is agendas being peddled.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: