this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024
705 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
59989 readers
3015 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Don't have one. Pure speculation. Much like yours, I assume? Unless you have a source to the contrary?
How often do you see professional videos on the trending page on YT?
Source for what? The network effect? I gave you a link, you can read.
And youtube is enshittifying.
These are both well-established effects. My sourcing is finished now. It beats your "pure speculation" unless you have something else you want to add.
This:
or this:
or this:
Yes, you've said that several times.
The fact that it exists is not evidence that it's taking place here.
LOL no.
Oh so you want sources for literally every tiny claim with no evidence that you've engaged at all, but you're sticking with "pure speculation" for your claims and you're fine with that? Just checking.
Bruh. You were the one asking for sources... I was simply establishing the fact that neither of us had them.
That's not how that works. I told you the point I had a problem with and wanted sourced, and you admitted it was pure speculation.
If you are skeptical about anything specific I'm saying, you can ask for the same thing. You didn't, you just said I hadn't sourced anything, which wasn't true, I gave you links so you could educate yourself, and since you're still confused on what any of it means, apparently you didn't do that. When I asked you what you wanted specifically sourced, you named everything, which is as pointless as naming nothing.
This is presumably because you don't actually care about sources, you were just embarrassed that you had to admit it was pure speculation and you wanted to project that back at me.
If you're actually curious to understand what I'm saying, you can ask a specific question, but you're not doing that. If you're just going to keep insisting that I'm pulling things out of my arse, you're wrong, but I won't keep replying.
LOL What? That's exactly how that works.
Right. The question is why you can't do the same.
I already did.
You linked to a general concept, and absolutely nothing about how that concept applies to the topic at hand.
LOL why won't you just admit you don't have any sources? This is so ridiculous. It's okay.
If I was embarrassed I wouldn't have admitted it at all. I probably would have accused you of not providing sources while sourcing random things I read about on Wikipedia while refusing any hint as to how they relate to the current conversation or back up my statements.
I've told you how the concepts apply, if you found it confusing you could ask. You didn't.
But you've admitted you're not actually interested in my answers, you just want to accuse me of pulling things out of my arse:
I don't know why I'd bother with someone whose only point here is to tear down whatever I'm saying. You don't even seem to have a position.