<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>Melting_Harps</author><text>&amp;gt; Perhaps because you have to have a Medium account to read the article?&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m anti-Nuclear (On Earth), but would prefer most people read it before commenting on it. So, I archived it.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.vn&amp;#x2F;OmALl&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.vn&amp;#x2F;OmALl&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>indymike</author><text>Perhaps because you have to have a Medium account to read the article?  I&amp;#x27;d love to read it, but I don&amp;#x27;t love the idea of logging in to Medium to do so.</text></item><item><author>mcjiggerlog</author><text>Not sure I&amp;#x27;ve seen a HN post before where so many people in the comments have clearly not read the article. Not even the summary of key points right at the top.&lt;p&gt;The piece is not anti-nuclear.&lt;p&gt;Also, risk is not binary. Finding out the true risk of something does not mean it&amp;#x27;s high risk and therefore negative. You can assess the risk of something and conclude that the risk is low and generally overblown, which is the point of the article.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Data from Chernobyl and Fukushima provide answers about the risks of nuclear</title><url>https://medium.com/generation-atomic/for-the-first-time-world-learns-truth-about-risk-of-nuclear-6b7e97d435df</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>wozer</author><text>I can read it without an account. Maybe try incognito mode.</text><parent_chain><item><author>indymike</author><text>Perhaps because you have to have a Medium account to read the article?  I&amp;#x27;d love to read it, but I don&amp;#x27;t love the idea of logging in to Medium to do so.</text></item><item><author>mcjiggerlog</author><text>Not sure I&amp;#x27;ve seen a HN post before where so many people in the comments have clearly not read the article. Not even the summary of key points right at the top.&lt;p&gt;The piece is not anti-nuclear.&lt;p&gt;Also, risk is not binary. Finding out the true risk of something does not mean it&amp;#x27;s high risk and therefore negative. You can assess the risk of something and conclude that the risk is low and generally overblown, which is the point of the article.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Data from Chernobyl and Fukushima provide answers about the risks of nuclear</title><url>https://medium.com/generation-atomic/for-the-first-time-world-learns-truth-about-risk-of-nuclear-6b7e97d435df</url></story>