Live data from Hacker News

Twitter Is in a Mess Because Jack Dorsey Was Too Busy Being a Bitcoin Influencer

bloomberg.com

21–22 of 22 posts

Re: Twitter Is in a Mess Because Jack Dorsey Was Too Busy Being a Bitcoin Influencer

#21
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming that the accumulation of money and power is the primary motivation, opposed to a byproduct or simply a means to an end. >I'm not attempting to read Dorsey's mind. I'm just saying there is in fact something to gain by accumulating more money. It seems like you were doing a lot more than making a theoretical point. "It's never enough for them."

The OP said "Dorsey has nothing to gain" and "he seems to be quite mindful", yet for some reason you criticize me for purportedly being a mind reader, but not the OP. Why is that? > You are assuming that the accumulation of money and power is the primary motivation, opposed to a byproduct or simply a means to an end. Power can be a means to an end. It can be a means to many ends. I never assumed it wasn't. I was disp…

>The OP said "Dorsey has nothing to gain" and "he seems to be quite mindful", yet for some reason you criticize me for purportedly being a mind reader, but not the OP. Why is that?

It is extremely obvious that the other guy was merely giving his opinion, whereas you were presenting your opinion as a fact.

Re: Twitter Is in a Mess Because Jack Dorsey Was Too Busy Being a Bitcoin Influencer

#22
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The OP said "Dorsey has nothing to gain" and "he seems to be quite mindful", yet for some reason you criticize me for purportedly being a mind reader, but not the OP. Why is that? > You are assuming that the accumulation of money and power is the primary motivation, opposed to a byproduct or simply a means to an end. Power can be a means to an end. It can be a means to many ends. I never assumed it wasn't. I was disp…

>The OP said "Dorsey has nothing to gain" and "he seems to be quite mindful", yet for some reason you criticize me for purportedly being a mind reader, but not the OP. Why is that? It is extremely obvious that the other guy was merely giving his opinion, whereas you were presenting your opinion as a fact.

> It is extremely obvious that the other guy was merely giving his opinion, whereas you were presenting your opinion as a fact.

What's the difference?

Isn't everyone presenting their opinion as a fact? They certainly aren't presenting their opinion as falsehood.

There seems to be a double standard applied to the OP and me. Also "It is extremely obvious that" is presenting your opinion as a fact, is it not?

Post reply on HN