[jMyles]

So?

Every single thread of this nature has a similar comment, and I really want to know (ie, I want to hear this fully fleshed out because I think your concerns are valid and worth exploring): is this demonstrative of a new (or in some way more valid) notion of the word "hacker" in "hacker news?"

My sense of that word, and of the culture that underlying it, is that a critical part of its critique is that obscurity, specifically in its implications for security (and thus, perhaps civility and peace and justice), is subject to deprecation in the information age, precisely in favor of styles of disclosure like this: where the pudding for the tasting is provided as the proof.

Have I missed something very important?

[minitech]

What? If there’s a question there, could you ask it in a straightforward manner, please?

[jMyles]

OK, I'll try. :-)

Are there good reasons to believe that obscurity (ie, keeping secret the means and methods of attack) is likely to be a viable defense in favor of civility and justice in the age to come?

[minitech]

No. Does the parent comment imply that somehow? (Did the reply end up on the wrong comment?)

[jMyles]

Oh my goodness. Yes. :-)

I meant to reply to this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14660862

Sorry about the confusion.