> Another article with a bunch of questionable data Could you please elaborate? > Vote with your wallet, you don't like it don't use it. But don't try to conv

> Another article with a bunch of questionable data Could you please elaborate? > Vote with your wallet, you don't like it don't use it. But don't try to convince me I don't understand this argument. You can easily do exactly what you ask of others: Don't click on the headline (the reader equivalent of "vote with your wallet"). Nobody is trying to convince you of anything. You came to the thread all on your own, and there since nobody reads every single topic posted on HN you made a conscious decision and an effort to expose yourself to this article and this discussion. > Because if you do, but leave things of the table... That argument makes just as little sense. We cannot discuss something because we have not yet discussed something else? Since this can be applied to every single topic, nothing can ever be discussed. The argument only makes some sense, depending on context, if the topics are chained together and the one being discussed depends on some other, and we don't have a result yet, so discussing the dependent one is not possible without knowing more about the previous one.