This isn't nitpicking about a minor detail, the fabricated claim is the entire core of the submission and the only reason it is getting this HN engagement. Imag

This isn't nitpicking about a minor detail, the fabricated claim is the entire core of the submission and the only reason it is getting this HN engagement. Imagine that they'd written a tweet saying "I think Google should not show ads above the search results" or "there should be fewer ads", and not added the screenshot. Do you think that would be near the top of the frontpage? I don't. If the author's point is that the "Ad" text is not distinct enough and conflicts with the doc's view that ads need to be clearly marked, why not actually say that? Because what is distinct enough is just a matter of opinion. So instead the author has taken something that's not a matter of opinion but a clear fact ("there are ads above the search results") and just made up the part about the doc critiquing this. It's genius, because everyone loves a good story of corporate hypocrisy. But it's also not true. Why exactly are we looking to reward dishonest clickbait?