3 ms·
What about your inconsistent candor Gizmodo? This site hasn't always been truthful, trust me. I've been reading Gizmodo for years.
by SuperHeavy256 2y ago
What about your inconsistent candor Gizmodo? This site hasn't always been truthful, trust me. I've been reading Gizmodo for years.
- realce 2y agoSo this article isn't truthful then, or you'd just like us to have a vague distrust of Gizmodo and the article is true?
- atoav 2y agoWhat about whataboutism? Isn't what you did here a perfect example of how – if we were to take it seriously – any discussion could be "stopped" merely by whatabouting about the messenger? I think Sam Altman can defend himself.
- mateus1 2y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism Edit: Atoav’s comment is more accurate.
- lupusreal 2y agoDoes Gizmodos sketchy past discredit the evident discrepancy between Sam's words and deeds? Or do you mean that one excuses the other? I really don't see your point.
- xyzwave 2y agoThis is an example of the “tu quoque” fallacy [0], and has no bearing on the claim they’re making about Sam. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]