Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Back to one-time end-to-end encrypted anonymous chats in 2025

yaps.chat

51–53 of 53 posts

Re: Show HN: Back to one-time end-to-end encrypted anonymous chats in 2025

#51
post #50
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I mean by "living in a bubble" is you believing something that is not true, because everyone in the bubble is telling you its true. Hence you believing that only including M/F as gender options is something that would greatly affect the success of an app. That is flat out not true. I promise you the vast majority of the world, or even the vast majority of the anglosphere do not care. People like the OP from othe…

> Hence you believing that only including M/F as gender options is something that would greatly affect the success of an app. That is neither what I believe nor what I wrote. You are making up that argument in your head and attacking a straw man. If you open a restaurant which only serves spicy food and I tell you “many people won’t come here because they dislike spicy food” while giving you a list of reasons why you…

You're getting awfully defensive for rmild criticism of what you wrote. And now you are doing a Motte and Bailey, pulling back when pointed out its indefensible. You wrote:

> You only allow “male” and “female” which right off the bat will make many people close the website, *even if they identify with either*

We are not in a restaurant and talking about food where there are so, so many choices. We are talking about implementing drop down menu for gender lol. In context, saying that many people will outright close the app is clearly implying that you think the success of the app can be affected.

And the reason?

Because they only allow male and female. Those are your words.

> Obviously and demonstrably false.https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43320313

Demonstrating nothing of the sort lol. Central Asia still have strong gender norms. In many places they are still thinking the role of women in society is to marry and have children. The idea of NB is not even in its infancy there.

Re: Show HN: Back to one-time end-to-end encrypted anonymous chats in 2025

#52
post #51
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hence you believing that only including M/F as gender options is something that would greatly affect the success of an app. That is neither what I believe nor what I wrote. You are making up that argument in your head and attacking a straw man. If you open a restaurant which only serves spicy food and I tell you “many people won’t come here because they dislike spicy food” while giving you a list of reasons why you…

You're getting awfully defensive for rmild criticism of what you wrote. And now you are doing a Motte and Bailey, pulling back when pointed out its indefensible. You wrote: > You only allow “male” and “female” which right off the bat will make many people close the website, *even if they identify with either* We are not in a restaurant and talking about food where there are so, so many choices. We are talking about i…

Clearly this conversation won’t ever lead anywhere productive. You’re surprisingly incapable of comprehending what an analogy is, separating an individual from a group (both myself and OP), or revisiting your own biases. You don’t get to tell other people what they imply or don’t, especially once they repeatedly point out your misunderstanding. Have some humility. There is no shame in admitting when you’re wrong and moving on.

For example: I was wrong to believe you were arguing in good faith and that providing more context would make us reach an understanding. I should have realised that your initial message was already an attempt to be dismissive instead of taking you at your word. Which in hindsight makes sense; if you are duplicitous in your words, you expect others to be the same. My sincere wish is that one day you are lucky enough to to understand the world isn’t black and white and not every issue requires taking a side.

Re: Show HN: Back to one-time end-to-end encrypted anonymous chats in 2025

#53
post #52
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're getting awfully defensive for rmild criticism of what you wrote. And now you are doing a Motte and Bailey, pulling back when pointed out its indefensible. You wrote: > You only allow “male” and “female” which right off the bat will make many people close the website, *even if they identify with either* We are not in a restaurant and talking about food where there are so, so many choices. We are talking about i…

Clearly this conversation won’t ever lead anywhere productive. You’re surprisingly incapable of comprehending what an analogy is, separating an individual from a group (both myself and OP), or revisiting your own biases. You don’t get to tell other people what they imply or don’t, especially once they repeatedly point out your misunderstanding. Have some humility. There is no shame in admitting when you’re wrong and…

I see that you don't have a new argument, and instead resort to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the topic. Concession noted.
Post reply on HN