324tgresgw

5 ms·

1.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
I'd claim the opposite. The weaker a statement, the more flexible it is. A pretty much maximally weak statement is "something will or will not happen". It's true with 100% certainty. And it's quite useless, since it
2.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
You hopefully realize that a sentence like "Who in the flying fuck are you to assume that I need help of any sort?" is not a very constructive way of arguing and usually disqualifies the writer from any form of civilized discussio
3.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
> I have literally no idea what you mean by "convergence" (in this context), so I'm going to guess that no; I'm not. Particularly since you appear to be using it as a rhetorical cudgel (meaning a stick to hit someone
4.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
> Why on EARTH would I 'assume good faith'? Am I a moron? And this attitude is why we can't have nice things.
5.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
Sneak an interview into lwn.net with all the details you need, then you got your secondary source.
6.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
> I get it's a hard problem. The primary source could have reasons to lie. I've just seen too many cases where I've seen the secondary source was wrong either being the primary source or being at the primary source. I&#x27
7.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
> Soon enough, the problem will go beyond text and encompass image and video[1]. And the people making that happen are we. The sw eng / CS / IT nerd crowd. Those reading HN. And it's rare to see critical voices of those wo
8.
by 324tgresgw 4y ago
Let's assume this is true for a moment. Then the issue is that you don't know which is which, a priori. Most strong statements end up false, eventually. The statements that eventually end up right may have been strong all along,