For all your whining about nuance, you sure love to take the most reductionist (straw-manned) interpretation of things and come out of the gate swinging with insults. Excuse me while I use this to justify dismissing your pedantry.

Mmm, beg to differ. Your whole position is tedious and pedantic.

It’s all anecdotal, folks.

I won’t vote for Trump, I just don’t like having to eat a shit pie and being told it’s french silk caramel, and if I say otherwise I’m Republican, Uneducated, or something else equally insulting.

I’m not saying “they changed the definition”. I’m saying “too many things about the way this term is gatekept from general use are flawed, and done for political gain sometimes, the average discussion of what is happening right now being one of them”. It depends on the context whether a more academic definition standard should be expected, and even then it’s not as straightforward as whoever is trying to shut down its use likes to pretend, and so perhaps a less-important hill to die on than whatever discussion is happening at that point in time."

OP is _ _________ ____ ___ _ _______ ____

Just because you’ve adapted to the lies doesn’t make them ok, nor the best version of what is possible

Negative hype can kill a product that could have been good.

Positive false hype can deceive people into wasting money.

Sure, complete honesty would be ideal, but if you say “well it sucks right now but we promise it will be ok when you buy it”, not many people would rush to order one.

And they shouldn’t. It’s just another way of saying “people acting rationally based on truthful information”

Many good products never made it to market because of insufficiently good perception.

That should be a separate issue. It’s not the only available path, just one often taken because it’s the most forgiving of shoddy business practices, doesn’t justify its existence, either.

On the flip side, creating positive hype out of smoke and mirrors can be used to kill a competitor’s product for no good reason, so it’s not quite ok either.

I think people are starting to realize the depth of corporate deception and bad-faith practices and how that affects everyone at large, and so they’re rightly tired of them and trying to reset it all back to simple, effective, and fair ethical standards.

Jobs: Ass

Apple: Ass

Engineers: overworked

stg democrats are trying so fucking hard to cause a schism party

yeah, hiring her as his assistant isn’t ideal as the risk to the company, but in terms of nepotism, it doesn’t sound as bad to me as the CEOs that will make someone a director over an entire department just because they’re banging (have seen this irl)

Removed by mod

Kentucky Yeeted Salmon

whines about reductionist rhetoric, uses insanely reductionist example

trash site

it is disproportionately men causing it

citation needed

wart on your tart?

ignoramus sands his anus?

I seriously doubt the majority of comments come from men. That it’s what they fixate on, is a different matter.

Maybe you never matured. Maybe you’re regressing. Who knows.

It’s high-school level dynamics, regardless

Eeexcept it’s really not like that. Next rebuttal.

oh noes! men!!

Bad-faith exaggerations, lazy scapegoating, and unwillingness to accept responsibility will overshadow the truths in your positions.