I appreciate the correction on the timing - I didn't check the comment ids when I discovered it initially and I've repeated the claim more than once, so mea cul

I appreciate the correction on the timing - I didn't check the comment ids when I discovered it initially and I've repeated the claim more than once, so mea culpa. Still, I don't think I'm outrageously wrong. Being fair, the earlier comment you cite is in the same thread. That precursor thread is excellent history, thanks also for that. EDIT: Wait, are we not both wrong here? Isn't this the first? Which, honestly, might be funnier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=599936 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=599936