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

There's no doubt the content is fascinating - but they're private documents. TC had no right to publish them, and we should all feel a little guilty for in part legitimizing TC's decision to publish them.


There are a lot of stories that were based on leaked documents.

Stories on watergate, Abu Ghraib, etc. were published because somebody leaked something private.

I have to admit though that they have more significance than Twitter.


The documents weren't leaked. They were stolen.

And I can't believe you effectively equated future business plans with torture as public interest stories, with the grudging ("have to admit") qualifier that one has "more significance" than the other.

This whole TC/Twitter episode has disturbed my faith in humanity, to be frank.


In those cases, there was a legitimate public interest in having them leaked and published. Very different.


So who decides what is public interest or not?

Twitter has millions of users. We provide some private data to them. Shouldn't we know what is being discussed privately on how they will use it?


When it has to do with the government, the public has a right to expect transparency. With a private organization, its different.


Torture? Business plans? Are you seriously suggesting that people can't tell the difference?


Yes, if the documents only related to how twitter intends to treat UGC, then you would have a point.


The was a public interest element there. The public has a right to know about those situations.

We may may interested, but we have no underlying right to know everything about a private company's operations and strategy.




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: