Hyperbole only makes people who don't know what hyperbole is lose trust. It's an obvious, unspoken thing between the author and reader here that he does not mea

Hyperbole only makes people who don't know what hyperbole is lose trust. It's an obvious, unspoken thing between the author and reader here that he does not mean 100% but instead very close to 100%. The author was quoting (very much the blog version of a re-tweet), so yes, there was very little added. The headline came from what he was quoting. Perhaps it would have been better to title his post something better. Actually the linked post he was quoting from has a better title. But nonetheless, an 8 year old could read that post and know the "no one" was not meant literally, so why go into a comment section and respond to it? It just seems like garden variety "aaaactually" behavior which adds nothing to anyone's day, but is in every freaking HN post and makes you kinda hate the site you love sometimes. How much better would this place be without all of that? The truth is sure a whole lot closer to "no one" than to the urban legend, just as if someone said (pre-2020) "no one's letter got lost in the mail and anyone who tells you that happened was lying". A statement that is right 99.9% of the time is barely even hyperbole. The reality is (according to this article) that people everywhere think this happened, it didn't, it can be verified that it didn't via ship manifests, and people only think that because of a scene in a movie. That's what a 5th grader would take from reading it. Can we all just respond to that? It's an interesting claim.