Hacker News Reader

Comment by Chlorus | Hacker News Reader

The comments @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/what-the-i... are hilarious, in a depressing way. Here's my favorite: "Personally, I like the idea of firing my internet service provider for not protecting me from such viruses and other malarkey. They are the ones transferring the viruses. They should be sued. And, after doing that it would be good exercise and fun to take a sledge hammer to all of my computer parts."

Who doesn't want their ISP filtering everything they browse?

View on HN

The comments on these kind of articles, on sites like the BBC's, are always a hilarious mix of misinformation, outrage and usually blame shifting away from personal responsibility. Well, it's hilarious until you come to the realisation that these may be the so called "regular" people and this may actually be how the majority thinks (not a whole lot, it turns out).

As opposed to comments on US news websites, which usually alternate liberal conspiracy theorizing with conservative conspiracy theorizing, the actual article only having the slightest relevance to the keyword-triggered axe-grinding that immediately commences.

It makes me wonder why news sites even allow comments. Remember the pre-social web? It worked just fine.

I'm sure it comes down to page views, like everything else on the web.

This is what gets me down more than anything. Some days it feels like we're on this downward spiral toward utter dissolution of personal responsibility and power. People don't realize that when you abdicate individual responsibility you also give up power. When the buck stops with you you have control, when the buck stops with your ISP, they have control. This applies to the workplace and government as well.

I think your sarcasm detector needs recalibrating - there is no way that comment was not tongue in cheek.

There's some internet law that points out that you can never know for sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

I almost said Poe's law! But I thought that might be the sex one (e.g. rule 34).

Maybe not all ISPs should do it, but don't think there isn't a HUGE market for filtered, safe internet access. Not everyone wants to trade feeling safe browsing without oversight for feeling safe browsing without viruses.

Well I'm glad my water supplier filters that, and I'm glad my electricity provider filters out spikes. While I personally don't want my ISP anywhere near my ip packets, the average person just wants to pay for Internet from an ISP and feel like the ISP is in some way providing more that just data. As the Internet evolves into a utility like water and electricity, more regulation, oversight and consumer protections are inevitable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com