alt Hacker NewsThe other replies to this show a form of argumentation that's always fascinated me.
You say "We should encourage X over Y" and the retorts are
* "Y will still exist"
* "Y can still be encouraged separately"
* "You should tell me the difference between X and Y"
* "Hey, I found an X that sometimes acts vaguely similar to Y!"
The third one is a classic, the straw man. A concise implication of error in which a good-faith response would be long-winded and boring comparatively.
To what end?
What are they hoping to get out of disagreeing with someone trying to encouraging our future culture to be one of relative wholesomeness?
... Why take the time out of one's day to say "well... encouraging X is great and all but you know what's better? passive-aggressively working against anyone that suggests it."?
Replies
it's low iq pedantry/contrarianism that pervades the tech industry that i refuse to engage with. it's exactly the same people that will bikeshed every feature into the abyss. i agree and appreciate your sentiment.
It is disappointing that it is so easy to bamboozle HNers with a straw man argument.
The original poster was clearly not making an analogy between professional soccer and only fans creators.
To be explicit, the comparisons were:
Cinematic actors -> TikTok creators
Victoria’s Secret model -> only fans creator
Pro soccer -> esports
I fail to see how the culture of our country will be negatively impacted by any of those changes. Comparing Cristiano Renaldo to OnlyFans is a straw man because that specific comparison was never suggested, except by the “rebuttal”