Hacker News Reader

Comment by rosalinekarr | Hacker News Reader

This is long overdue. Chelsea will probably be doing interviews soon, and since [she's already been pretty outspoken about internet freedoms][1], she may even bring some much needed attention to issues like net neutrality, government surveillance and the never ending erosion of our online rights.

Let's hope the media doesn't tear her apart.

[1]: https://twitter.com/xychelsea/status/847264510247190532

View on HN

No one is going to ask her anything about net neutrality. They'll ask her how she was treated, what she's going to do next and how she feels about the previous and current administration. She'll say something mildly negative about Trump. Trump will tweet about it, and everyone will start talking about Trump's tweet.

the myopic eyesight of the masses.

Channeled professionally by the corrupt complicit media.

Unfortunately, many of the people that need convincing with regards to net neutrality and online rights also view her as a traitor with mental problems and thus "normal, patriotic Americans" should not worry about these things, except to prevent "liberals" from creating more "regulations" for companies and putting up barriers to keep our law enforcement from finding the "terrorists'" plans.

Effecting change still takes time and effort. That requires people putting the time in, regardless if they themselves aren't a persuasive spokesperson with a mainstream audience. There's much work to be done to push the ideas out to a wider audience.

For one thing she is certainly more credible not being in prison.

This comment is so loaded with strawmen and vitriol I don't think it meets our communities comment guidelines.

Yes, but it's still true, as my own conversations with conservative in-laws shows.

And in my case, quite false as a conservative with many conservative friends that disagree with your anecdote. This is always the problem, personal anecdotes rarely equal data.

The problem here (and the reason you are getting downvoted, I believe) is you think your anecdote of your friends' opinions trumps falcolas' anecdote about his/her family as untrue, instead of imagining the colorful world it is with various shades of conservatism living side by side.

For what its worth, I have family that believe like grandparent's family. Your anecdotes cannot convince them or me what their beliefs really are. This line of opinion does exist.

We know the real reason for down votes is it's voicing support for conservative views and questions the HN group think bubble.

You can dress it up with whatever fancy logic you want, HN commenters are as bias and unthinking as any others.

The original comment by RcouF1uZ4gsC didn't characterize conservative views or conservative ideology on this issue; they characterized what many people believed.

Empirically, this is true.

If those many people are wrong on net neutrality because they do not understand the issues, why is it that HN commenters are the biased and unthinking ones?

You can not change what you do not try to understand, you cant deconstruct something you keep from trespassing in your mind.

If you put the fingers in your ears and sing lalala i cant hear you- you end what might have been a discussion. I found most conservatives i met not to reactionary dictator supporters. They are just people with reasonable concerns, finding and in constant fear of some radical social discussion dominance bombers showing up shutting any chance on discussion with a warcrime down.

Well unfortunately, you and your conservative friends differ in opinion from the conservatives elected into power, which is who we're talking about. People's anecdotes don't matter; it's the prevailing opinion fed to the masses through conservative politicians and media that needs to change.

It's really not. Some people do feel this way and pointing it out isn't vitriol.

The worst thing that can happen to a cause is some crazy jackass being held up by the media as the spokesperson.

I was on board for the tea party until the media grabbed a few nut bags and made them the de facto spokespeople for the cause. It was purely about limited government until it got co-opted.

I feel as though I am gathered at the feet of a dispirited grandparent, being told tales of the purity they would have espoused if they hadn't been so rudely interrupted by the persistent existence of the world undermining their certainty.

In my hay days the youth still behaved.. We were stealing apples all day. Todays youth..they form a line to the shop that would make the krauts proud.

I think you're falling prey to the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. All political groups have multiple goals (as they have multiple people in them, it is inevitable). Politics is the coordination of these goals.

Perhaps. But I would argue that the media plays a large part in undermining any movement they don't like.

They get to pick the person who they hand the microphone to and they will pick the craziest bat-shit insane person for that role if they don't like what your selling.

I'm just speaking from experience.

The only legitimate role of government is to protect capital!

I took the copious use of quotation marks in the comment to indicate that it was a caricature of a type of opinion that, sadly, is out there.

I'd give it more up-votes if I could.

I don't know why other posters are disputing your assertions.

Lets cut through all the noise and look at the President's uncut opinion on net neutrality.

>Donald J. Trump‏ Verified account

>@realDonaldTrump

>Obama’s attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/53260835850816716...

So there, that's what about one third of the country are led to believe about net neutrality. Just like with all the fake news recently, facts and rebuttals don't help one bit, and make the believers believe even more in their own "facts".

Good luck getting Breitbart and conservative radio on board with NN, they are fundamentally opposed to anything Obama did, plus are skeptical of govt regulations and there is a lot of money to be made from the cable industry fight on NN.

This is so bass akwards, but of course as a non tech based septuagenarian it's not like I expected him to have an actually informed decision on this important issue.

But if anything net neutrality protects the voices of smaller media which, other than fox, many conservative media e.g. breitbart fall into that category. CNN wouldn't like it but they could pay for a network fast lane, Alex Jones or TheBlaze wouldn't nearly be able to compete!

I heard that same canard posted on conservative blogs about two years ago.

That whole argument makes no sense, but given where it comes from one of Trump's advisers probably whispered it into his ear.

There's a cynical beauty in successfully making your entire position: "Don't trust anyone who contradicts me".

Also unfortunately, those pro net neutrality are never willing to accept they may be wrong or may not see the complete picture and therefor assumptions they are correct follow with no chance of changing it. I suggest you and those like you get your ego in check and quit trying to convince people that what you believe to be correct is in fact the only truth because it's pure opinion, on both sides of the argument and the "I'm smarter than you" liberal/left-leaning attitude is way beyond old already.

I'm hoping she takes some time (at least a few months) to visit friends and family and unwind from her time in prison before the media ensnares her, even a little.

(warning - not intellectually gratifying) For selfish reasons I hope she sort of fades from public attention, just so I don't keep having Elvis Costello stuck in my head every time she's in the news.

( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvRQDsH0Yho )

How are Manning and Net Neutrality even related subjects and when did Manning become a telecom expert?

unfortunately the fact she is trans will make her an easy target to smear

Reply on news.ycombinator.com