>Look, you chose to run with a figure that was nonsense at face value just because it suited your narrative. You then defended the figure and you made up a narr

>Look, you chose to run with a figure that was nonsense at face value just because it suited your narrative. You then defended the figure and you made up a narrative about how executives should be believed over random commenters, which was - at best - a strawman. You then keep digging yourself into ever deeper holes without simply coming out and saying that you were wrong to believe the initial figure without any critical thought. The longer you keep this up the more silly you look. I suggest you read over the comment chain more carefully and note the authors. I jumped in at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45405359 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45405359 and was specifically objecting to the part of the comment that was claiming the executive was lying with no evidence. I made no such claims or arguments based on the 7% figure.