<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>nateabele</author><text>David Gregory (a nightly news anchor) waved around a high-capacity magazine on national television within the borders of the District of Columbia, which is a felony offense. No charges filed. [0]&lt;p&gt;Explain that one, Mister Ideological Predisposition.&lt;p&gt;[0] &lt;a href=&quot;http://nypost.com/2013/01/12/no-charges-for-nbc-host-david-gregory-over-ammunition-magazine/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;nypost.com&amp;#x2F;2013&amp;#x2F;01&amp;#x2F;12&amp;#x2F;no-charges-for-nbc-host-david-g...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>roel_v</author><text>I think you could have up with this explanation had you tried, or had you done an objective evaluation of the situation before posting, but for the sake of other posters who might be less entrenched in their ideological predispositions: the difference is clearly that Google doesn&amp;#x27;t do any filtering or doesn&amp;#x27;t willingly lead people to certain material. Google presents an uncurated (within limits, like DMCA takedown notices, court-mandated filtering, ...) overview of &lt;i&gt;all&lt;/i&gt; links out there. To go along with the (strained) analogy above of giving driving directions to somebody&amp;#x27;s house and telling them how to get in: what Google does is provide an atlas, and maybe a way to search therein.</text></item><item><author>suprgeek</author><text>Google links to a lot of sites, even a large number that contain Hacked&amp;#x2F;Obscene&amp;#x2F;Defamatory&amp;#x2F;Copyrighted material as defined by appropriate laws.&lt;p&gt;Since Google is posting these publicly (using many fancy techniques to improve their relevance no less) how many billion years of Sentencing will Brin &amp;amp; Page face under these extremely well worded&amp;#x2F;just&amp;#x2F;sane  Federal Laws?</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Attorneys for Barrett Brown want case on linking to hacked material dismissed</title><url>http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/04/attorneys-barrett-brown-hyperlink-hacked-material-want-case-dismissed</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>herghost</author><text>It started off like your were going to provide a sound rebuttal, but it didn&amp;#x27;t materialise.  Instead we got:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Google doesn&amp;#x27;t do any filtering (except the filtering that it does do)&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Google doesn&amp;#x27;t give directions to &lt;i&gt;somebody&amp;#x27;s&lt;/i&gt; house and tell you how to get in, it gives directions to &lt;i&gt;everybody&amp;#x27;s&lt;/i&gt; houses and tells you how to get in.</text><parent_chain><item><author>roel_v</author><text>I think you could have up with this explanation had you tried, or had you done an objective evaluation of the situation before posting, but for the sake of other posters who might be less entrenched in their ideological predispositions: the difference is clearly that Google doesn&amp;#x27;t do any filtering or doesn&amp;#x27;t willingly lead people to certain material. Google presents an uncurated (within limits, like DMCA takedown notices, court-mandated filtering, ...) overview of &lt;i&gt;all&lt;/i&gt; links out there. To go along with the (strained) analogy above of giving driving directions to somebody&amp;#x27;s house and telling them how to get in: what Google does is provide an atlas, and maybe a way to search therein.</text></item><item><author>suprgeek</author><text>Google links to a lot of sites, even a large number that contain Hacked&amp;#x2F;Obscene&amp;#x2F;Defamatory&amp;#x2F;Copyrighted material as defined by appropriate laws.&lt;p&gt;Since Google is posting these publicly (using many fancy techniques to improve their relevance no less) how many billion years of Sentencing will Brin &amp;amp; Page face under these extremely well worded&amp;#x2F;just&amp;#x2F;sane  Federal Laws?</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Attorneys for Barrett Brown want case on linking to hacked material dismissed</title><url>http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/mar/04/attorneys-barrett-brown-hyperlink-hacked-material-want-case-dismissed</url></story>