> Calling arguments "absurd" or "disingenuous" is itself arguing in bad faith, and respectable publications can do better. Calling an argument 'absurd' or 'dis

> Calling arguments "absurd" or "disingenuous" is itself arguing in bad faith, and respectable publications can do better. Calling an argument 'absurd' or 'disingenuous' is not an argument, it's a conclusion. Its value lies entirely in how well the point is proven. Here, the article does a fair job of that task. It supports the idea that the argument is absurd because mitigations against browser fingerprinting are already in development, and it supports the idea that the argument is disingenuous because in a comparable situation Google itself did not deploy a privacy workaround, so it should know that fingerprinting is not a universal response.