3 ms·

You've completely abandoned any attempt to argue the point about the security of web apps vs non-web apps, which was the original point of this discussion, so n

You've completely abandoned any attempt to argue the point about the security of web apps vs non-web apps, which was the original point of this discussion, so now let me address all the tangents you like going on to deflect. You're an expert at cherry picking which arguments you'd like to reply to, to avoid tackling the main issue at hand. > It is true that I don't like the lack of diversity (that would come from everything being webtech on top of Chromium), and it is also true that I like the security that comes from a managed app store. You've said previously: "My point is that webapps move everything into the browser, going towards a world where something like ChromeOS is the only valid way to use a computer. I want to choose my OS". [1] So you think the best way to increase OS diversity is to get developers to submit their apps to proprietary app stores that only run on their own respective operating systems, instead of using open web standards that work on every operating system? How does that make sense? > I do! I can have it both ways! Isn't that marvelous? No! You can't! Not if you value logical consistency. > If you can't understand how this is possible, I think we can stop here. We won't get anywhere if you can't understand what I write. I don't think you comprehend what you're writing, or rather, you're not willing to admit that what you're writing is incomprehensible. Saying "my argument makes sense, you just can't understand it" is just you being petulant. You want to "stop here" because you've argued yourself into an illogical corner. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38913989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38913989

palata 3y ago
> Saying "my argument makes sense, you just can't understand it" is just you being petulant. I did not say that. I said that my preferences are consistent. Security and diversity are orthogonal concepts. I can say: "I want as much security as possible AND as much diversity as possible". It is not an argument, it is a preference. You come and say: "Aha, I got you! You cannot want both security and diversity! You have to want one or the other, not both, because I say so! You just lost the debate, you dumb ass". Fine, I lost the debate, you're the best.
- throwitaway1123 3y ago
  First of all, I've been saying from the very beginning that your stance implies both less security AND less diversity. But I knew you would grasp onto the security part like a lifeline, because you've run out of ways to derail the conversation, which is why I clarified in my previous comment. You ignored my clarification, and once again decided to argue with a straw man. I've never seen so many bad faith straw man arguments in my life. Forget the security aspect of it since you clearly can't debate that, and just focus on the diversity, and you're STILL wrong. As you like to say when you're clarifying, "let's take a step back here". I'll just repeat my last comment, and hopefully you won't evade it like you always do: You've said previously: "My point is that webapps move everything into the browser, going towards a world where something like ChromeOS is the only valid way to use a computer. I want to choose my OS". [1] So you think the best way to increase OS diversity is to get developers to submit their apps to proprietary app stores that only run on their own respective operating systems, instead of using open web standards that work on every operating system? How does that make sense? Do you get it yet? You're claiming you want OS diversity, but you're advocating for the solution that results in LESS OS diversity, that's why you're contradicting yourself, and that's why your position is logically inconsistent. You absolutely know this, which is why you're dodging every attempt to actually debate it. And I know you know this, because you purposely omitted the first sentence of my paragraph when you quoted it, which was [2]: "And now you're arguing in favor of the app store duopoly which contradicts your point about software diversity." That part didn't fit your narrative, which is why you omitted it. You're better at evasion, and rhetorical trickery than you are at actually discussing technical topics. If you had said instead: "I admit my position implies less OS diversity, but in this case I'm willing to make that trade off in exchange for better security guarantees", then we could move on to the security question (and you'd lose that debate too). You can admit that one of those pesky web developers you're so fond of condescending to actually has a good point, it won't hurt. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38913989#:~:text=what%27s%20your%20point%3F-,My%20point%20is%20that%20webapps%20move%20everything%20into%20the%20browser%2C%20going%20towards%20a%20world%20where%20something%20like%20ChromeOS%20is%20the%20only%20valid%20way%20to%20use%20a%20computer.%20I%20want%20to%20choose%20my%20OS,-%2C%20I%20don%27t%20want https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38913989#:~:text=what%2... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38934276#:~:text=did%20make%20sense.-,And%20now%20you%27re%20arguing%20in%20favor%20of%20the%20app%20store%20duopoly%20which%20contradicts%20your%20point%20about%20software%20diversity.,-You%20can%27t%20have https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38934276#:~:text=did%20...

palata 3y ago

> Saying "my argument makes sense, you just can't understand it" is just you being petulant. I did not say that. I said that my preferences are consistent. Security and diversity are orthogonal concepts. I can say: "I want as much security as possible AND as much diversity as possible". It is not an argument, it is a preference. You come and say: "Aha, I got you! You cannot want both security and diversity! You have to want one or the other, not both, because I say so! You just lost the debate, you dumb ass". Fine, I lost the debate, you're the best.

throwitaway1123 3y ago
First of all, I've been saying from the very beginning that your stance implies both less security AND less diversity. But I knew you would grasp onto the security part like a lifeline, because you've run out of ways to derail the conversation, which is why I clarified in my previous comment. You ignored my clarification, and once again decided to argue with a straw man. I've never seen so many bad faith straw man arguments in my life. Forget the security aspect of it since you clearly can't debate that, and just focus on the diversity, and you're STILL wrong. As you like to say when you're clarifying, "let's take a step back here". I'll just repeat my last comment, and hopefully you won't evade it like you always do: You've said previously: "My point is that webapps move everything into the browser, going towards a world where something like ChromeOS is the only valid way to use a computer. I want to choose my OS". [1] So you think the best way to increase OS diversity is to get developers to submit their apps to proprietary app stores that only run on their own respective operating systems, instead of using open web standards that work on every operating system? How does that make sense? Do you get it yet? You're claiming you want OS diversity, but you're advocating for the solution that results in LESS OS diversity, that's why you're contradicting yourself, and that's why your position is logically inconsistent. You absolutely know this, which is why you're dodging every attempt to actually debate it. And I know you know this, because you purposely omitted the first sentence of my paragraph when you quoted it, which was [2]: "And now you're arguing in favor of the app store duopoly which contradicts your point about software diversity." That part didn't fit your narrative, which is why you omitted it. You're better at evasion, and rhetorical trickery than you are at actually discussing technical topics. If you had said instead: "I admit my position implies less OS diversity, but in this case I'm willing to make that trade off in exchange for better security guarantees", then we could move on to the security question (and you'd lose that debate too). You can admit that one of those pesky web developers you're so fond of condescending to actually has a good point, it won't hurt. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38913989#:~:text=what%27s%20your%20point%3F-,My%20point%20is%20that%20webapps%20move%20everything%20into%20the%20browser%2C%20going%20towards%20a%20world%20where%20something%20like%20ChromeOS%20is%20the%20only%20valid%20way%20to%20use%20a%20computer.%20I%20want%20to%20choose%20my%20OS,-%2C%20I%20don%27t%20want https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38913989#:~:text=what%2... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38934276#:~:text=did%20make%20sense.-,And%20now%20you%27re%20arguing%20in%20favor%20of%20the%20app%20store%20duopoly%20which%20contradicts%20your%20point%20about%20software%20diversity.,-You%20can%27t%20have https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38934276#:~:text=did%20...