Not OP, and even though I agree with them (that it _is_ orthogonal), I think the burden of proof should be with the original claimer, rather than the refuter needing to prove a negative.
Re:John Carmack: My Steve Jobs Stories
by acjohnson55 on Monday May 14, 2018 @09:37PM
(#17070931)
I kind of agree, but it's really just a discussion, which I feel has a lower bar than a formal debate. If the refuter thought the argument was weak, they could have simply responded with their point of view and some evidence, rather than complaining. It's not like the OP was making claims on hidden truths.
Re:John Carmack: My Steve Jobs Stories
by hacker11235 on Monday May 14, 2018 @08:20PM
(#17070598)
Unfortunately comment sections usually don't work like that :(
>By the way, you criticize the previous commenter's assertion, but you haven't provided any rationale on why they might be mistaken.
Fine. John Rockefeller, Henry Clay Frick, Steve Cohen, Bill Gross, LBJ, Larry Ellison, Pablo Escobar, Donald Trump, Bo Xilai, Harvey Weinstein, Vladamir Putin. And those are just a small fraction of the HUGE assoles. Not even run of the mill assholes like Jobs.
Recent history (and ancient history) is filled with successful assholes. So, my rationale that it's not something that can be asserted without evidence is simply the prevalence. Which, to be honest, probably didn't need to be said. This is common knowledge.
By the way, you criticize the previous commenter's assertion, but you haven't provided any rationale on why they might be mistaken.