Comment by eviks
1 day ago
> The vast majority of the debate was dominated by how people imagined it worked, which was very different to how it actually worked.
But not very different to how it was actually going to work, as you say:
> If you change parts of it, sure.
Now try to reason your way out of the obvious "parts of it will definitely change" knee-jerk.
I’m not sure I’m understanding you.
Apple designed a system. People guessed at what it did. Their guesses were way off the mark. This poisoned all rational discussion on the topic. If you imagine a system that works differently to Apple’s system, you can complain about that imaginary system all you want, but it won’t be meaningful, it’s just noise.
You understand it just fine, you're just trying to pass you fantasy pod immutable safe future as rational while painting the obvious objections based on the real world as meaningless noise.
Your point did not come across. It still isn’t. I don’t know what you mean by “pass you fantasy pod immutable safe future as rational”. You aren’t making sense to me. I absolutely do not “understand it just fine”.
2 replies →