No, they're not.

Look, I'm a developer, I'm somewhat privacy-conscious, and I quit Facebook years ago because they're slimy.

But "doesn't keep up with technology and privacy news" is not the same as "dumb". For any product as big as Facebook, there are people of all kinds using it, including many who are brilliant.

Is it wise to trust Facebook with your data? No. But not having come to that conclusion doesn't make someone dumb. Please don't be so condescending. I'm sure many of those "dumb" people could be condescending about some of your life decisions based on their own expertise. But it's not helpful.

Parent comment is making a sarcastic reference to Zuckerberg's comments about facebook users.

http://www.businessinsider.com/embarrassing-and-damaging-zuc...

Why do we censor words? Aren't we all adults here? Does HN have a policy about this?

We're adults here but that doesn't mean we should pursue a higher level of discourse.

If you want cursing or other low content, there's always Reddit.

Self-censoring is in no way 'a higher level of discourse'. Not using curse words is one thing, but in some situation (esp. like this where a direct quote is used) there is no real reason to censor swear words in an adult conversation.

Exactly. It's not that you are not using the word if you put several asterisks instead of the actual letters.

I know it's originally from a Zuckerburg quote but the point is that if you want to call someone a dumbfuck, call them a dumbfuck. Censoring the latter half doesn't somehow elevate the discourse.

I mean on average the readership of HN are vastly more likely to be aware and care about their data and identity privacy than the average facebook user. so in this sense you're not wrong.