Flagging your comment. See guidelines.

"Please don't impute astroturfing or shillage. That degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about it, email us and we'll look at the data. "

Obviously, I have a bias coming into this discussion (and so do you).

Mine comes from experience in a world of hardware and physical products that gives me a greater affinity for the business model of hardware companies than "open source friendly" advertising giants. I have a fascination with the war of words free software adherents wage against nvidia - the company could give out candy to children and it would get criticized because Linus gave them the finger.

I'll also admit that I am entertained by the no true scotsman squirming that occurs when I point at things that nvidia has done that don't support the story that it is the evil empire.

You're on the right side of this argument but that doesn't mean you shouldn't answer the question.

He's under no such obligation. Unless you have hard proof it would be nice if you did not contribute to attempts to label people here as shills. See HN guidelines.

Ha, fair enough. I would like to argue but the relevant comment has been flagged, so I don't have the material to make a case, and I gracefully concede this point.

However while we're being HN etiquette pedants, the original comment clearly breaches this guideline:

> Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents.

The original comment virtually embeds a confession that it is flame war material:

> Cue the argument that these "don't count" because they use CUDA.

I introduce this just to point out that a strict interpretation of the HN rules can stifle reasonable discussion.