News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol by nickpsecurity on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @11:30AM (#12901558)
I agree with the throwaway. You should drop it in favor of average person or something else that's neutral. People seeing us insult them will only hurt adoption. Plus, many of these people that dont know much about computers are smart in other fields or have other talents. We aren't all supposed to have same strengths. So it's double-insulting shen it's an intelligent, but non-technical, user we're talking about.
Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol by throwaway98764 on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @12:03PM (#12901898)
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm here for the insights. Trying to court everyone just waters down the comments until HN is indistinguishable from reddit. I prefer apparent condescension and a thick skin over PC half-conversations and watered-down intelligence.
Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol by taejo on Tuesday November 08, 2016 @03:19PM (#12903574)
You can have the insights without the insults. They add literally nothing, except to degrade the conversation until HN is indistinguishable from 4chan.
Re:A Formal Security Analysis of the Signal Messaging Protocol by sametmax on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @05:01AM (#12908776)
I agree. I didn't mean to start a PC war, just noticed that the term seemed out of place.