<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>arbitrage</author><text>&amp;gt; Not worthy to be left over to whiners that offer no solutions.&lt;p&gt;This is not a fair criticism.  I can tell someone, &amp;quot;Hey dude, your house is on fire&amp;quot; without having to offer them either a bucket of water or a new house.&lt;p&gt;This type of argument is frequently used to forestall any criticism whatsoever.  Bad supervisors often say things like, &amp;quot;don&amp;#x27;t give me complaints without also giving me a solution.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s sloppy thinking, and rejects valuable feedback.</text><parent_chain><item><author>rockdoe</author><text>So what would the author prefer? That security sensitive software doesn&amp;#x27;t check for updates? WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG.&lt;p&gt;Somewhat later there is this remark:
&lt;i&gt;Why are these add-ons?  Why are they not designed-in and built-in to the browser?&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Well, this &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt; actually built-into Firefox Nightly. It&amp;#x27;s called Tracking Protection...and it updates its lists using the exact same SafeBrowsing the original author whines about.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s hard to take these people seriously, which is bad, because privacy is a serious problem. Not worthy to be left over to whiners that offer no solutions.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Ghostery and NoScript-like add-ons frequently phone home</title><url>https://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/2015-April/015236.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>travjones</author><text>It seems that the authors tone is not &amp;quot;whiny,&amp;quot; but maybe that was my interpretation. He is raising a serious concern: tools that people think are keeping them safe&amp;#x2F;anonymous are actually not 100% anonymous. I think this is always important to consider. Most of us on HN are technical, and we are already aware of (even worse) privacy &amp;quot;violations&amp;quot; than those described in the article. Nonetheless, most people who use the internet are not aware of this and it will be important to keep the layman informed for his&amp;#x2F;her own sake and for the future of the net.</text><parent_chain><item><author>rockdoe</author><text>So what would the author prefer? That security sensitive software doesn&amp;#x27;t check for updates? WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG.&lt;p&gt;Somewhat later there is this remark:
&lt;i&gt;Why are these add-ons?  Why are they not designed-in and built-in to the browser?&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Well, this &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt; actually built-into Firefox Nightly. It&amp;#x27;s called Tracking Protection...and it updates its lists using the exact same SafeBrowsing the original author whines about.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s hard to take these people seriously, which is bad, because privacy is a serious problem. Not worthy to be left over to whiners that offer no solutions.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Ghostery and NoScript-like add-ons frequently phone home</title><url>https://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/2015-April/015236.html</url></story>