Correct. It's continuing the general observation first made here (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45725408 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45725408) t

Correct. It's continuing the general observation first made here (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45725408 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45725408) that doesn't specifically mention GMO at all and a disagreement with the premise of the reply to that here (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45725551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45725551). Obviously the argument is using GMO as the subject due to the context of the article, but you can have the exact same argument about powerful companies angling for capture of slices of many industries and even parts of the general human experience in many places where you can say "well if it wasn't going to be good for the farmers/taxi drivers/warehouse workers/software engineers/people looking for a date/restaurant chefs/whoever, they're not stupid and wouldn't agree to it".