Re:Google Pixels are no longer the AOSP reference device
by J_McQuade on Thursday June 12, 2025 @03:44PM
(#44262321)
"It's not happening"
"Yes it is"
"Well it's not that bad"
"Here are the names of people who have died"
"Well that's not EVERYONE, like someone said it was"
"Yes, I concede, it was only like dozens of people, you certainly have the high-ground in this debate about why we shouldn't have all these dead people"
... I feel the author has missed the point, which has led to an argument that is horrible and, I would say, wrong. Fact-checking is important but, to most people, whether it was 6 or 10 people murdered is not the substance of the debate - the original point is that we probably shouldn't have this guy going around murdering people.
If you then wade in to the debate and your only contribution is to try and make that argument X% less strong then yeah, that really is pretty cringe. If the purpose of the debate is to convince people that Joe Criminal is a horrible rotter that should never again see the light of day, and your aim is to make that argument less persuasive, then you are literally defending him. You may even be right to do so (say, if 10 murders leads to a punishment of horrible tortures and 6 just hanging), but don't pretend that's not what you're doing.
"Yes it is"
"Well it's not that bad"
"Here are the names of people who have died"
"Well that's not EVERYONE, like someone said it was"
"Yes, I concede, it was only like dozens of people, you certainly have the high-ground in this debate about why we shouldn't have all these dead people"
... I feel the author has missed the point, which has led to an argument that is horrible and, I would say, wrong. Fact-checking is important but, to most people, whether it was 6 or 10 people murdered is not the substance of the debate - the original point is that we probably shouldn't have this guy going around murdering people.
If you then wade in to the debate and your only contribution is to try and make that argument X% less strong then yeah, that really is pretty cringe. If the purpose of the debate is to convince people that Joe Criminal is a horrible rotter that should never again see the light of day, and your aim is to make that argument less persuasive, then you are literally defending him. You may even be right to do so (say, if 10 murders leads to a punishment of horrible tortures and 6 just hanging), but don't pretend that's not what you're doing.