3 ms·

Chris Lattner on Twitter: >My decision has nothing to do with "openness". The "friend" cited is either fabricated or speculating. Folk just want to make [apple

by EdJiang 10y ago

Chris Lattner on Twitter: >My decision has nothing to do with "openness". The "friend" cited is either fabricated or speculating. Folk just want to make [apple_emoji] look bad. [angry_face_emoji] https://twitter.com/clattner_llvm/status/819974025371787264 https://twitter.com/clattner_llvm/status/819974025371787264

DoodleBuggy 10y ago
It's OK. We're in a post-fact era.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
e28eta 10y ago
Even before reading his tweet, it seemed pretty clear it was speculation from the quote! > "Eventually I know that can really wear people down." That doesn't say s/he knows it wore Chris down, just that it could have.
- mikeash 10y ago
  If only the headline reflected that.
pfarnsworth 10y ago
Blogs and shitty news sites like Business Insider don't practice standard due diligence like newspapers used to. They just print whatever they want, it's ground zero for fake news. There should be more consequence for sites printing things like this, but there isn't, and that's why we are suffering with misinformation.
- calbear81 10y ago
  There are consequences if the person affected chooses to take action and meets the legal definition of libel or slander.
- argonaut 10y ago
  Stop misusing the word "fake news." Business Insider is not the New York Times, but even they would not openly fabricate a source [1]. My guess is they ran a story with an actual source, but the source was speculating. [1] Outright making stuff up is the definition of fake news. 100% made up.
  - atmartins 10y ago
    How is speculating not equal to fake?
    - argonaut 10y ago
      Because it was clear from the article who the source was and that this was hearsay. Also the article updated itself with a rebuttal from Lattner. Fake news would not talk about who their source is. Fake news would not publish Lattner's denial. There is a difference between fake news and second-rate journalism. If someone doesn't think there is a difference, I'm guessing they also see the world in black and white.
      - pfarnsworth 10y ago
        Stop making up your own definition of "fake news." You're not some authority, you're just a random Internet user like everyone else.
    - iwintermute 10y ago
      Speculation (if it's clearly marked as such) - is just an "entertainment" piece - for example, you could write in your blog what are the next features for iOS without any clear sources - that would be just speculating about. Fake news - news that has wrong info as facts or provide something as sourced when the original source never said that. I think that's rather huge difference (speculation from some outsider can still by chance be true, fake is by definition false)

by EdJiang 10y ago

DoodleBuggy 10y ago

It's OK. We're in a post-fact era.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

e28eta 10y ago

Even before reading his tweet, it seemed pretty clear it was speculation from the quote! > "Eventually I know that can really wear people down." That doesn't say s/he knows it wore Chris down, just that it could have.

mikeash 10y ago
If only the headline reflected that.

pfarnsworth 10y ago

Blogs and shitty news sites like Business Insider don't practice standard due diligence like newspapers used to. They just print whatever they want, it's ground zero for fake news. There should be more consequence for sites printing things like this, but there isn't, and that's why we are suffering with misinformation.

calbear81 10y ago
There are consequences if the person affected chooses to take action and meets the legal definition of libel or slander.
argonaut 10y ago
Stop misusing the word "fake news." Business Insider is not the New York Times, but even they would not openly fabricate a source [1]. My guess is they ran a story with an actual source, but the source was speculating. [1] Outright making stuff up is the definition of fake news. 100% made up.
- atmartins 10y ago
  How is speculating not equal to fake?
  - argonaut 10y ago
    Because it was clear from the article who the source was and that this was hearsay. Also the article updated itself with a rebuttal from Lattner. Fake news would not talk about who their source is. Fake news would not publish Lattner's denial. There is a difference between fake news and second-rate journalism. If someone doesn't think there is a difference, I'm guessing they also see the world in black and white.
    - pfarnsworth 10y ago
      Stop making up your own definition of "fake news." You're not some authority, you're just a random Internet user like everyone else.
  - iwintermute 10y ago
    Speculation (if it's clearly marked as such) - is just an "entertainment" piece - for example, you could write in your blog what are the next features for iOS without any clear sources - that would be just speculating about. Fake news - news that has wrong info as facts or provide something as sourced when the original source never said that. I think that's rather huge difference (speculation from some outsider can still by chance be true, fake is by definition false)