Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very different argument from "this feels false," which is just some subjective bullshit. However, your argument is little better. You're saying "it stands to reason that a widely used product would have already hit this corner case by now." The problem with your argument is that it's a tautology. If in fact the statement by dcurtis is the first efflorescence of the problem, your line of thinking would reject…
>The problem with your argument is that it's a tautology. If in fact the statement by dcurtis is the first efflorescence of the problem, your line of thinking would reject it anyway No its not; it's defining a probability. This report is most likely false, because it would be unlikely for this to be the first instance of it. It's not defining a logical proposition -- that's just you extracting more gaurantees from th…
If you think something "feels false" but you have no evidence for it, that's not a particularly strong basis for reasoning.
>it's defining a probability.
This is not true. It's classifying the first instance as false.