Just to check , are you asking:
"What does a $75m investment from the company that famously removed "don't be evil" as their motto have to do with evil?"
Doesn't sound difficult to draw the straight line there.
edit: just in case you haven't had news access for the past 20 years, that's not the only reason someone might have an issue with funding from google.
An important distinction.
It’s highlighting hypocrisy. It’s asking: do you take this problem seriously, or are you just complaining?
That's a very black and white way of looking at things.
I don't necessarily disagree with the rest of what you said, but presenting it as a false dichotomy like that undermines your argument about other peoples bad faith approaches to rhetoric.
edit: as do downvotes with no response when called out.
Unobvious enough that i had to ask for clarification, but that could just be me.
Here is the equivalent of the other side :
https://www.carexpert.com.au/opinion/the-latest-data-shows-speed-cameras-dont-save-lives
I'm assuming you're looking at the title and that it's from a website called "carexpert" and assuming that it's not entirely unbiased.
As well you should be.
I'm not espousing centrism, i'm expecting some basic citation vetting.
The server CPU's are called epyc and they are powerful, but not in the same way.
Server CPU's are geared to different types of workloads but if you built a desktop workstation with decent one it would be still be a beast.
I wasn't arguing that the server CPU's aren't powerful, i was saying that the latest ryzen desktop cpu was something I'd personally consider to also be powerful.
The threadrippers are also up there in terms of power, but the OP was specifically talking about ryzen.
"Essential" implies more than just a small part, but if you want to claim otherwise you are free to do so.
Do you also say “no, ALL lives matter?”
Because project management is comparable to civil rights? That's some weak sauce whattaboutism.
They do yes, this is clearly marked as an opinion piece.
What i was trying to convey is to not expect stellar journalism, opinion or otherwise, from a media source that has built it's readership on sensationalism and tabloid shenanigans.
That is of course, just my personal opinion.
It doesn’t escape me, but what part of what I’ve said has invited confrontation or dismissal? I’m asking honestly.
In this case i can't see any big red flags.
The tone is a possibility, as i said, being correct isn't an absolute defence against being considered an arsehole.
To be clear, I'm not implying you were incorrect, or the tone was incorrect, just that that kind of certainty (evidence based or not) gets some people's backs up.
It’s grating that it keeps happening and I keep telling people to stop.
I don't think it's what you actually meant but this could be interpreted as "Somebody didn't accept my answer and argued, so i told them to stop, they didn't even though i was clearly correct, this is grating"
Hyperbole aside, it’s frequent enough that I can see a pattern of people starting petty arguments trying to win and throwing low punches instead of clarifying what is being said and why.
Firstly, welcome to public internet forums in general, this is common behaviour.
That aside, there are numerous trolls and bad faith "debaters" around, but just because you consider something petty doesn't mean the other person does.
This is what i was trying to convey in my reply earlier, if almost all interactions end up with what you consider petty behaviour it's worth considering the possibility that you are contributing to that outcome somehow.
Like, I don’t even want to argue.
So don't, if you don't want to continue the interaction then don't reply.
Meaning what, it’s also me?
Possibly, yes.
lol If I’m the one telling people to stop and act like adults and that gets 180° turns in behaviour, what does that say to you?
Honestly, it says to me that your communication skills might need some work.
Again, to be clear i don't mean your communication of facts and information, i mean your ability to understand how phrasing something in a certain way might illicit a certain kind of response.
"Stop acting like a child" is a very good way to build enmity and confrontation, which is useful in some cases, if you intend to illicit that response.
However, saying something like that and then being confused/frustrated when people get confrontational and dismissive suggests a lack of understanding about the impact of tone and phrasing.
So, not a good faith take then, oh well.
"Logical" is not a binary position. It's a spectrum.
Agreed, not sure how it's relevant but it seems we agree on something after all.
I'm sure you don't care, but if you sound like a combination pocket-mulching, militant-vegan, cycling purist, those are the the only people who are going to hear what you have to actually say.
That might be your target market, in which case, congrats i suppose.
That level of condescension and pretension is pretty difficult to overcome, especially in a text only format, intentional or not.