Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

According to TFA:

* Sarah Palin says I should be "hunted down like Osama bin Laden", a Republican bill sits before the US Senate seeking to have me declared a "transnational threat" and disposed of accordingly. An adviser to the Canadian Prime Minister's office has called on national television for me to be assassinated. An American blogger has called for my 20-year-old son, here in Australia, to be kidnapped and harmed for no other reason than to get at me.



swombat, just to add a little humor to that. "hunted down like Osama bin Laden" When exactly did the US of A actually manage to hunt down Osama bin laden? If Assange is hunted the same way, he is sage until around 2030.



This doesn't really answer your parent's question, does it?

If you use TFA or RTFA make sure you do it properly, it's rude.


Agreed. Not only does it not answer my question, it's against the HN guidelines: http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.


How is it against the HN guidelines?


Okay, it's not really too much of a big a deal, but the way I read it, it was "TFA" as in "read the fucking article". I thought "come on, dude, it was a valid question": Julian, in his article, doesn't actually mention the source, just some vague reference to an unnamed blogger. Given the seriousness of the kidnap threats, I wanted to find out if it was a credible claim. E.g., I wanted to see the original source and find out (a) who said it (b) what was actually said and (c) ascertain how credible a threat it was.

So when I read "TFA", I thought "come on, dude, that's a bit patronizing, it's a valid question, fair shake of the sauce bottle, mate". I think a few other people thought the same way, too.

Personally I believe that there are no stupid questions (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1853740) and we shouldn't diss questions stupid or otherwise.


Yes, it does. Explicitly and clearly. With a direct quotation.

What more could you ask for?


What more could you ask for?

The exact source.

There's a world of difference between Julian's assertion of "a US blogger" versus a link to the original source (which jacquesm supplied). Perhaps we're living in the wikipedia generation, but it's quite concerning that people on Hacker News automatically consider assertions to be as credible as original sources!

I mean, seriously, Julian makes a statement about how his son has received kidnapping threats, and people just swallow it without questioning? I'm not saying that I think Julian is lying (and having seen jacquesm's link, it seems like he wasn't), but I think it's incredibly important for anyone wishing to critically analyse current affairs to view all claims, on all sides of the debate, with a skeptical mind.


For instance jacquesm answer? It's way more informative, it contains the actual answer to the question, is not arrogantly witty. Enough?




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: