Maybe because it appears to be an official response so is relevant, regardless of whether people think it's entirely correct. That can be a good reason to upvote, IMO.
IMO, because its either intentionally misleading or painfully uninformed, the fact that its info that came directly from the horse's mouth isn't a very good reason to up-vote.
Comments
did he pay to be the top voted comment, or are the HN readers really that stupid and voted him up?
(Did he really just argue that sha1 isn't broken? ohmy)
Maybe because it appears to be an official response so is relevant, regardless of whether people think it's entirely correct. That can be a good reason to upvote, IMO.
I agree, its why I voted up the post.
IMO, because its either intentionally misleading or painfully uninformed, the fact that its info that came directly from the horse's mouth isn't a very good reason to up-vote.
Don't high voted answers push up a post?