Re:BusyBeaver(6) Is Quite Large
by moralestapia on Saturday June 28, 2025 @04:08PM
(#44407752)
The wording implies that Aaronson does not know what he's talking about.
>If you want to learn about actual Busy Beaver results [...]
This is saying there is no discussion of the results in the article, which is not true.
>Unlike Aaronson, he actually is on the forefront of Busy Beaver research [...]
This implies Aaronson has no (or lesser) authority on the subject and suggests we should listen to somebody else who purportedly has more of it.
Nowhere in @NooneAtAll3's comment is there an argument made against/for the contents of the article themselves, an example of that would be:
"Aaronson mentions X but this is not correct because Y" or something along those lines.
Instead, the comment in it's full extent is either discrediting (perhaps unintentionally) and/or appealing to the authority of people involved. That's ad hominem.
>If you want to learn about actual Busy Beaver results [...]
This is saying there is no discussion of the results in the article, which is not true.
>Unlike Aaronson, he actually is on the forefront of Busy Beaver research [...]
This implies Aaronson has no (or lesser) authority on the subject and suggests we should listen to somebody else who purportedly has more of it.
Nowhere in @NooneAtAll3's comment is there an argument made against/for the contents of the article themselves, an example of that would be:
"Aaronson mentions X but this is not correct because Y" or something along those lines.
Instead, the comment in it's full extent is either discrediting (perhaps unintentionally) and/or appealing to the authority of people involved. That's ad hominem.