3 ms·
The same complaint can be levelled against the "faux hubris" of your comment, but it doesn't make for great discussion. it would be more compelling if you made
by kyleee 5y ago
The same complaint can be levelled against the "faux hubris" of your comment, but it doesn't make for great discussion.
it would be more compelling if you made arguments to explain your statements of certainty, and left out the weird generalizations about "typical HN comment" as if HN is some monolith as opposed to a discussion board comprised of individual commenters
- uoaei 5y agoAnd now the hyper-individualist "there is no such thing as statistical tendencies nor homogenizing feedback loops" take-haver rears its head. Welcome home, HNer.
- uoaei 5y agoAs for the arguments you demand, I think it would be more efficient for everyone if you -- individual you! -- took up the mantle and accessed (for yourself!) the copious amounts of research and analysis present across the known universe, instead of repeating exactly the mistake that GP makes in assuming this conversation is not happening everywhere all of the time.
- kyleee 5y agoi made no demands, I'm not the one making the initial assertions, and you don't even have any idea to what extent we may agree/disagree on these issues