Hacker News Reader

Comment by nis0s | Hacker News Reader

I think they might also mean surveillance tech, like plate readers and facial recognition.

The article contains the questions they asked. The questions are only asking about social media. Specifically whether social media is sufficiently regulated and whether political advertising should be allowed on social media.

It does not mention surveillance, and it's not about tech in general. The title is misleading. (Edit: the OP kindly updated the title and it's no longer misleading)

I'm almost positive a lot of HN Users don't read the studies they comment on. They probably don't even read the articles.

Which, ironically, given the topic of this post, speaks to the kinds of pathologies we find out on social media these days.

The comments are often more interesting than the original articles.

Admittedly, I skimmed through the article, but there’s an ongoing discussion around regulation of biometrics, other personal indicators, and privacy (not covered in this article).

> I think they might also mean surveillance tech, like plate readers and facial recognition.

How should we square that with EU politicians pushing for MORE surveillance, not less? One of many examples: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jan/24/eu-dig...

Social media tech, and surveillance tech, but I repeat myself

And "don't build Skynet[1] or LLM overlords that can overpower us through the sheer power of their intellect"

[1]the UK calls its military satcomms network that, but we've always been different...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com