3 ms·
This is a non-sequitur. In the analogy that people who are not paying for a product can be affected by the pollution caused by making that product have standing
by Eddy_Viscosity2 2y ago
This is a non-sequitur. In the analogy that people who are not paying for a product can be affected by the pollution caused by making that product have standing, does not in any way suggest those people can or should be forced to make pollution themselves. This is what you are suggesting.
- Arnt 2y agoI think you're saying "because ① pollution affects bystanders, ② bystanders have standing to complain about pollution, and ③ choosing not to write certain things is like pollution, bystanders also have standing to complain if someone chooses not to write these things". Do I understand that correctly? Can you explain why the choice not to write is like pollution?
- Eddy_Viscosity2 2y agoI see the problem, its 3. I was being more general in equating "the news" with "stuff released into the environment". But 3 implies "stuff not released into the environment" which is not what I meant. PS, How did you do those numbers in the circles? I've not seen that in a HN comment before (I like it). I see sometime people switching fonts in comments, but I hadn't figured out how to do that either.