I agree it's a technology and HN story, but as you can see the conversation is much more loaded around the emotional content of the leaks than the technology involved. (Or the implication of such technology on modern society, which I find interesting)

Without getting into too much naval-gazing, when I visit a topic with highly emotional posts, I always try to turn the subject around. See how it plays when it's a cause I fiercely support, people were hurt, and secrets were kept. Ask if my opinion would be different based on how I personally feel about the underlying politics, or if I am acting as part of a general rule that makes sense and can be applied to the world at large.

Tough conversations to have. I doubt we're going to have them here, and I doubt wikileaks has done anything at all to help us.

I await the day a startup can take topical news stories and help people understand where they agree on issues, how to develop and apply general principles by taking people with vastly different worldviews and finding consensus. I think this technology is possible. But I also feel like it's going to be a long wait. Too much notoriety and publicity to be had fanning the emotional flames.

This is a historic moment, no doubt. But it is not one I find any joy in, only deep sadness for all those involved.

What is so sad about people engaging in a conversation? I would rather individuals give their own unfettered opinion and communicate to each other their agreement and disagreement than some hand holding by some benevolent start up who is going to direct us onto the way we should think or even direct our conversation.

People are complex and so is their communication with each other. You can not just follow a script as that limits communication based on whatever some benevolent start up finds correct. While currently, in the mids of chaos and confusion, understanding is reached, for people are communicating and if nothing else leaning how things are viewed from other people.