3 ms·
You aren't persuaded by what I wrote because I did not attempt to persuade you. You asked me to explain what I meant by "plausible deniability" so I did. > Neu
by Atheros 2mo ago
You aren't persuaded by what I wrote because I did not attempt to persuade you. You asked me to explain what I meant by "plausible deniability" so I did.
> Neutral inanimate object or tool X is "bad" (we need laws/bans/broad social disapproval, etc.), because it enables bad faith actors
I never made this argument. I did, however, give what I thought was a pretty good example of good faith actors behaving badly when there is a plausible excuse for them to do so. (narcissism vs. creepiness)
I don't think you're a human. Whenever someone has misunderstood me this badly in the past, and I've kept talking to them, they turned out to be a bot. I've typed this out for you just in case I'm wrong but I'm not going to respond any further.
- peter_d_sherman 2mo agoFair enough! My intention was not to misunderstand you personally, only to express the general trend of what I see happening on HN, other message forums, and the mass media in general... In fairness to you, you make some excellent points, and you long kept going into the discussion when other people would have simply given up and left. So, to that I say, well done, and thank you for the excellent conversation!