2 ms·
Did I at any point say the video wasn't important? I don't recall doing so. I did assert that the telemetry was more interesting than the video, but the telemet
by jtriangle 3y ago
Did I at any point say the video wasn't important? I don't recall doing so. I did assert that the telemetry was more interesting than the video, but the telemetry being more interesting than the video feed doesn't mean the video, itself, is not interesting. You missed that in favor of being pedantic, that says something about you, and if I thought it had any chance of helping, I'd tell you to take a long look in the mirror and wonder why you are the way you are.
That'll be my last reply though, I'm watching a youtube stream of a guy trying to get gentoo to boot off NTFS, it's not going well, but it is more interesting than providing detailed analysis of simple language that you've misunderstood.
- Terr_ 3y agoImagine an alternate universe where everything was cut short by: "Oops, yeah, video would be important for that case, I was focused on a different failure-mode." > Did I at any point say the video wasn't important? Sounds like Motte and Bailey time. The expansive Bailey: "We don't need raw video to concretely answer whether the machine did better or worse than a human, the telemetry is sufficient." The defensible Motte: "I never said the video was unimportant..." > pedantic [...] detailed analysis Step 1: Casually dismiss the other person as having not read your post. Step 2: When they lay it out in detail, whine that they read your post too closely.