3 ms·

This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. But even with GM and car security is

This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. But even with GM and car security issues, I think it is an overstatement to say that they have done "mass murder". Yes, there have been some faults in GM cars, and recalls, and accidents, but overall, if we look at modern cars and traffic, I'd say they are remarkably safe. For instance, if we ride bikes instead, the likelihood of death per passenger km is about 10 times higher than with car traffic. I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in.

Ensorceled 11y ago
Hmmm, I wasn't aware people were having trouble following my line of thought. They covered up a flaw that have been linked to over a hundred deaths rather than issue a recall or even a "don't put shit on your key chain" warning. I'm not sure what else to call causing a hundred people to die simply to protect your bottom line. Maybe you need to kill more people for it to be "mass"? The original commenters point was why are we chasing Google when there are other corporations doing the equivalent of mass murder. So absolutely no one in this thread, especially me, is accusing Google of mass murder. In fact we are saying the exact opposite. No wonder you are having problems following my line of thought.
crimsonalucard 11y ago
>This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. This thread was not about google. I started it. Nowhere in my original comment did I mention google. The article may involve google I'm only remarking on a part of the article. My comment shifted the topic a bit to litigation and corporations in general. It seems quite obvious to me. I think the evidence points to your own ability to follow the thread then someone writing something about GM. >I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in. Dude when did anyone say "Google" mass murdered? Nobody said that. Read english man. When I said "mass murdered" I said corporations have mass murdered. People have mass murdered other people too. Both are true statements.
- ptaipale 11y ago
  The headline was about Google. Only tech companies (Google, Apple, Microsoft) were mentioned prior to the mass murder comment. I suggest you tone down and slow down a bit, so it is easier to understand what you mean. Even with GM, I think using words "mass murder" is an overstatement. Their cars are exceedingly safe when you look at them in any historical context. I do understand the sentiment if you apply it to tobacco companies, but it would have been a rather long logical jump to get what you mean in the context since everyone else was talking about Google and Apple.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    >Only tech companies (Google, Apple, Microsoft) were mentioned prior to the mass murder comment. I started the thread with the "mass murder" quote. The parent to this thread is the article itself so there is technically no "prior" comment. The order in which you see the comments listed under the parent isn't in order of time. In fact, I was actually the first person to comment on this article and thus "prior" to every other thread that you see here. > I suggest you tone down and slow down a bit, so it is easier to understand what you mean. This is a veiled and negative insult which is not directly in violation of HN rules but nevertheless you are provoking me. You are blaming me and my dictation ability for you inability to comprehend my writing. It's a kind of personal attack because you are remarking on my conversational ability which has nothing to do with the topic. What's even stranger is, I can't "slow down." The speed in which you parse this text is not controlled by me, but by you. If anyone needs to slow down, it's you. >Even with GM, I think using words "mass murder" is an overstatement. Their cars are exceedingly safe when you look at them in any historical context. I do understand the sentiment if you apply it to tobacco companies, but it would have been a rather long logical jump to get what you mean in the context since everyone else was talking about Google and Apple. The Headline was about google but the thread was started by me; I dictated the context of the conversation. This is a very normal thing that humans typically do if you are familiar with human behavior. In typical human conversation, topics and context can shift and change and move in different directions which is what is going on here. Thus there is no "rather long logical jump." What's going on here is a failure to interpret a shift in the context of the conversation. The topic that was shifted to and from can be illustrated in the diagram below: "google" -> "all Corporations in general" Thus in the context of "all Corporations in general" crimes involving the deaths of multitudes of people would be interpreted by a typical human to encompass the definition of the words "mass murder." Following your advice I have "slowed down a bit" while typing out this response. I hope the speed in which I type will assist you in understanding what I mean. Thanks.

Ensorceled 11y ago

Hmmm, I wasn't aware people were having trouble following my line of thought. They covered up a flaw that have been linked to over a hundred deaths rather than issue a recall or even a "don't put shit on your key chain" warning. I'm not sure what else to call causing a hundred people to die simply to protect your bottom line. Maybe you need to kill more people for it to be "mass"? The original commenters point was why are we chasing Google when there are other corporations doing the equivalent of mass murder. So absolutely no one in this thread, especially me, is accusing Google of mass murder. In fact we are saying the exact opposite. No wonder you are having problems following my line of thought.

crimsonalucard 11y ago

>This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. This thread was not about google. I started it. Nowhere in my original comment did I mention google. The article may involve google I'm only remarking on a part of the article. My comment shifted the topic a bit to litigation and corporations in general. It seems quite obvious to me. I think the evidence points to your own ability to follow the thread then someone writing something about GM. >I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in. Dude when did anyone say "Google" mass murdered? Nobody said that. Read english man. When I said "mass murdered" I said corporations have mass murdered. People have mass murdered other people too. Both are true statements.

ptaipale 11y ago
The headline was about Google. Only tech companies (Google, Apple, Microsoft) were mentioned prior to the mass murder comment. I suggest you tone down and slow down a bit, so it is easier to understand what you mean. Even with GM, I think using words "mass murder" is an overstatement. Their cars are exceedingly safe when you look at them in any historical context. I do understand the sentiment if you apply it to tobacco companies, but it would have been a rather long logical jump to get what you mean in the context since everyone else was talking about Google and Apple.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  >Only tech companies (Google, Apple, Microsoft) were mentioned prior to the mass murder comment. I started the thread with the "mass murder" quote. The parent to this thread is the article itself so there is technically no "prior" comment. The order in which you see the comments listed under the parent isn't in order of time. In fact, I was actually the first person to comment on this article and thus "prior" to every other thread that you see here. > I suggest you tone down and slow down a bit, so it is easier to understand what you mean. This is a veiled and negative insult which is not directly in violation of HN rules but nevertheless you are provoking me. You are blaming me and my dictation ability for you inability to comprehend my writing. It's a kind of personal attack because you are remarking on my conversational ability which has nothing to do with the topic. What's even stranger is, I can't "slow down." The speed in which you parse this text is not controlled by me, but by you. If anyone needs to slow down, it's you. >Even with GM, I think using words "mass murder" is an overstatement. Their cars are exceedingly safe when you look at them in any historical context. I do understand the sentiment if you apply it to tobacco companies, but it would have been a rather long logical jump to get what you mean in the context since everyone else was talking about Google and Apple. The Headline was about google but the thread was started by me; I dictated the context of the conversation. This is a very normal thing that humans typically do if you are familiar with human behavior. In typical human conversation, topics and context can shift and change and move in different directions which is what is going on here. Thus there is no "rather long logical jump." What's going on here is a failure to interpret a shift in the context of the conversation. The topic that was shifted to and from can be illustrated in the diagram below: "google" -> "all Corporations in general" Thus in the context of "all Corporations in general" crimes involving the deaths of multitudes of people would be interpreted by a typical human to encompass the definition of the words "mass murder." Following your advice I have "slowed down a bit" while typing out this response. I hope the speed in which I type will assist you in understanding what I mean. Thanks.