5 ms·
Claiming that Robert Epstein has an ax to grind sounds like you know him personally. Independent of that, it does seem like you spent thirty minutes of reading
by ryacko 7y ago
Claiming that Robert Epstein has an ax to grind sounds like you know him personally. Independent of that, it does seem like you spent thirty minutes of reading articles on the subject before you made that comment.
I am certain that 90% of the people who step into Congress are crooks, or at least have no honest opinion, so I would only use details of Epstein’s testimony to confirm existing biases.
- tptacek 7y agoHe does have an ax to grind against Google; that's not really in dispute. It's not clear that he's sharpening his blade on this particular Senate testimony, but it's a reasonable question to ask, since he has no particular expertise in the topic.
- ryacko 7y agoI will equally say without any evidence that Epstein has forgiven Google, and is speaking out against Google for purely mercenary reasons.
- tptacek 7y agoThe difference is that you're saying something without evidence, and I'm saying something for which pretty extensive evidence is on the record. Please note that I'm being careful about separating what I have evidence for --- Epstein's grudge against Google over the quarantining of his hacked website --- from what I don't --- his testimony before the Senate.
- ryacko 7y agoYou are claiming that Epstein is a petty man, and has decided to devote his entire life towards smearing Google, although at this point it is for wages? You disguise your rather strong claim with passive voice and a conclusion that doesn’t attempt to convince me at all.
- tptacek 7y agoI think if you read any other comment of mine in this thread, you will not see me saying that Epstein has "decided to devote his entire life towards smearing Google". I don't know what you mean by "a petty man" and further don't think it'd be productive to explore that. I'd appreciate it if you could try a little harder to respond to arguments I've actually made.
- ryacko 7y agoOkay, I will try harder, I suppose I owe that to you to understand your arguments and where you come from. I was unclear, I meant that your arguments leave one with the inference that Epstein would dedicate the remainder of his life against Google. I mean petty man as in man motivated by petty reasons. I am unaware if you really meant to imply that or if you’ve been repeatedly communicating unclearly.
- tptacek 7y agoOnce again, my argument is simple: 1. There is clear evidence that Epstein holds a grudge against Google based on the quarantine they put on his website. 2. It is not clear that this grudge determines his opinion about Google's influence on elections. 3. However, the grudge is relevant information in anyone's consideration of Epstein's opinions. Do with it what you will.
- ryacko 7y ago1. The evidence shows that Epstein was angered by Google’s actions, but there is no evidence of his present emotional state. I don’t know anyone who would be angry for seven years for an automated notation warning caution for their own website. 2. Yes, but it is not even clear he holds this opinion or is being paid to parrot viewpoints he is paid for. 3. No evidence there is a grudge, see my argument in item #1.
- tptacek 7y ago