Comment by eviks

1 day ago

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”.

  • If they are running safe mandatory scans on your phones for this, you seem shocked and angry that anyone would imply that this would lead to safe mandatory scans on your phones for that and the other, and open the door for unsafe mandatory scans for whatever.

    If you can't acknowledge this, it puts you in a position where you can't be convincing to people who need you to deflect obvious, well-known criticisms before beginning a discussion. It gives you crazy person or salesman vibes. These are arguments that someone with a serious interest in the technology would be aware of already and should be included as a prerequisite to being taken seriously. Doing this shows that you value other people's time and effort.

    • > you seem shocked and angry that anyone would imply that this would lead to safe mandatory scans on your phones for that and the other

      Where have I given you that impression? The thing that annoys me is the sensible discussion being drowned out by ignorance.

      > If you can't acknowledge this, it puts you in a position where you can't be convincing to people who need you to deflect obvious, well-known criticisms before beginning a discussion.

      I cannot parse this, it’s word salad. People who need me to deflect criticisms? What? I genuinely do not understand what you are trying to say here. Maybe just break the sentences up into smaller ones? It feels like you’re trying to say too many things in too few sentences. What people? Why do they need me to deflect criticisms?