The title of the post is that these are stronger than concrete. The title isn't "these bricks could be used for many things". OP is directly responding to a dubious claim. Where as you would seem to prefer they ignore the dubious claim and just be endlessly positive.

I'd sure as hell rather know if my home is going to collapse if I build them out of plastic bricks than someone telling me all of the things I could have used them for instead.

OP did not directly respond to the dubious claim but you did. Thank you for reminding me that they're claiming this is stronger than concrete. That indeed is dubious. I think the conversation is swinging too far in the opposite direction, however, and many people seem to be writing this off.

Of course there are uses. I am even very happy people try to re-use what would normally be put to waste (unless it causes more plastic to disperse in environment).

Just don't claim it is "stronger" than regular brick if that is not true.

> Maybe rather than shitting all over something for a use it's not necessarily intended for, maybe try to think of other uses this kind of innovative processing can be improved would be much more productive.

Not a very constructive response. Do you have any counterpoints to the other user's points, or do you just not allow people to point out potential issues with materials that may be used for human housing? Progress requires a balance between some people focusing on achievements and some pointing out the things that can still be improved. If I were going to rely on a new material, I'd definitely want its issues to be pointed out and addressed first, rather than just jump to using it.

There is a little thing called tone. And criticizing someone’s over negativity is constructive.

You’d want that negativity problem to point pointed out and addressed, wouldn’t you?

I wouldn't. I would rather a world where people are strong enough to deal with "tone", which seems to be a highly subjective thing. How about giving someone else the benefit of the doubt instead of pointing out "negativity"?

The original article says nothing about the plastic bricks being used for housing. All the HN criticism about them not being usable for housing is attacking a strawman.