11–20 of 38 posts
"By the way, what have you done that's so great? Do you create anything, or just criticise others work and belittle their motivations?" Burn.
"By the way, what have you done that's so great? Do you create anything, or just criticise others work and belittle their motivations?" Burn.
Upvoted for hilarity factor. But from a logical standpoint this is really a bad argument. Writing often has a destructive purpose; what the person has "created" has very little to do with whether his criticism is valid or not.
I love that there is no reply after Steve's final question. What DOES this guy make?
"By the way, what have you done that's so great? Do you create anything, or just criticise others work and belittle their motivations?" Burn.
Upvoted for hilarity factor. But from a logical standpoint this is really a bad argument. Writing often has a destructive purpose; what the person has "created" has very little to do with whether his criticism is valid or not.
Which application do you want to write that oh so really demands Flash and would give users better experience than going native?
I don't believe such an application exists!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that really matters. Imagine someone makes a disease, and starts infecting people with it. Should you really dismiss the guy who says, "hey, this disease is bad, stop infecting people with it" simply because he doesn't make a vaccine? If anything, not making anything means you are less likely to be biased. Steve likes the iPad because he made it, not because it's intrinsically good. This biases his view…
Anyway, making something is good, but not making something doesn't mean you lose any credibility. It means you don't have credibility to start with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that really matters. Imagine someone makes a disease, and starts infecting people with it. Should you really dismiss the guy who says, "hey, this disease is bad, stop infecting people with it" simply because he doesn't make a vaccine? If anything, not making anything means you are less likely to be biased. Steve likes the iPad because he made it, not because it's intrinsically good. This biases his view…
Anyway, making something is good, but not making something doesn't mean you lose any credibility. It means you don't have credibility to start with.
Internet drama really has come a long way, hasn't it?
Indeed. Instead of arguing with Apple fanbois on your favorite forum, you can have the exact same inane and irrelevant argument with one of Apple's co-founders! And it even ends with namecalling and a personal attacks! I love it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Upvoted for hilarity factor. But from a logical standpoint this is really a bad argument. Writing often has a destructive purpose; what the person has "created" has very little to do with whether his criticism is valid or not.
Yeah, it's also a pretty weird attitude. Certainly not one that scientifically or engineering-minded people should have. If someone alleges that your physics experiment has a problem, the proper answer isn't: "Oh yeah? Well I've got tenure and recently won a major award in my field. What kind of physics discoveries have you made lately?" Scientists actually lose a lot of reputation if they start getting that sort of…