valion
> Declaring my experience to be invalid and based on nothing but hype doesn't engage people like me at all.
> And it's the people like me, the middle-of-the-road developer working on enterprise software, that either need convincing to not use the tools, or for our habits to change to minimise the harm.
> Because otherwise we're quietly getting on with using it, potentially destroying forests and lakes as we do.
His point in the article is that if you are aware of the potential harms and are still willing to "quietly [get] on with using it", you're complicit in the harms caused.
In your response, you seem to be both (1) acknowledging his points about potential harms and your willingness to proceed even with awareness of those harms, while (2) simultaneously absolving yourself of any responsibility caused by your participation, by claiming the poster didn't do enough to "engage people like [you] at all".
Interesting take.