> If I were discrediting the channel as a means to discredit the video or its content

If that's not your intent, you're just making personal attacks on the creator as a complete non-sequitur to the thread, which is even more of an inappropriate abuse of the HN audience than well-poisoning would be.

> as a complete non-sequitur to the thread,

Yes, exactly. They say themselves: "They could be right, they could be wrong, better engineers than me will tell in the end." They have no interest in the topic at hand, just poisoning the well, then defending their thinly veiled well-poisoning.

Sorry, can you clarify from elsewhere-- am I trying to discredit the topic at hand, or do I have no interest in it?

I know it doesn't really make a big difference to your narrative, but you really need to pick one or the other of "political non-sequitur" and "interested well-poisoning". They just don't go together.

One cannot discredit a 'topic'

am I debating an ELIZA upgrade

You're getting out of bounds. If you think my comments here are irrelevant or abusive, please report them to a moderator and desist replying.

Otherwise, I'm here to talk if you are.

So? I've said a few times I don't care about the claims.

They could be right, they could be wrong, better engineers than me will tell in the end. So what? Saying something true doesn't create an obligation to listen.

In fact, if you say enough true things loudly enough, they'll cart you off to jail. It's really not a great argument.