Where to even begin with this. I'm unfairly biased because I misread what he said? After re-reading, I can see that he may not have been making the point I thought he was making. I'd argue he should make a point like that more clear, but fine, it's on me that I misinterpreted.
> the hysteria on HN is ridiculous.
"Hysteria"? How do you get hysteria from my response? Because I asked for citations for what I thought was an extreme claim?
> At least read the damn thing
I did. Reading it was a pre-requisite for posting my response, which cited specific links he included.
> and try to be objective about it.
Asking for high quality sources was my attempt to be objective.
--
Edit: Actually, you know what, I take it back. If you write a sentence like this, it's on you if it's misinterpreted:
"For example, we know that the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 leaked out of a lab in Taiwan in late 2021."
Heck, I'm not even sure it wasn't the author's intent at this point.
> the hysteria on HN is ridiculous.
"Hysteria"? How do you get hysteria from my response? Because I asked for citations for what I thought was an extreme claim?
> At least read the damn thing
I did. Reading it was a pre-requisite for posting my response, which cited specific links he included.
> and try to be objective about it.
Asking for high quality sources was my attempt to be objective.
--
Edit: Actually, you know what, I take it back. If you write a sentence like this, it's on you if it's misinterpreted:
"For example, we know that the delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 leaked out of a lab in Taiwan in late 2021."
Heck, I'm not even sure it wasn't the author's intent at this point.