Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Hypocrisy on the side of author is a logically false argument about the actual content.

I can be a murdering psychopath and express in my memoirs from prison that while I love killin', murder is immoral. Murder is still widely accepted as being immoral regardless of who asserts the opinion.

That aside I found the article's author heavily corralled observations to support his opinion.

> I’m not trying to compare operating systems with social media or mobile applications,

Yes, yes you are.

> I’m not saying we should solve every UI and UX issue with a start menu

I find it hard to actually understand what the author is really saying, perhaps he/she is saying nothing at all. The irony about substance and honesty isn't lost on me.



I agree that hypocrisy doesn't refute their argument but it does demonstrate that the author themselves either doesn't believe what they're writing or they have some other unknown reason for being hypocritical.

Seeing as no other reason was expressed in the article, I am comfortable taking the hypocrisy as a sign that the they don't believe what they're writing. In my experience, this usually means they are trying to sell me something.


Sorta feel the same way since the article really has zero substance. I hate being cynical but the days of Win95 transparency are truly over.


They're not all the way dead yet. Sublime text seems to be very transparent, in a 90's software sense. Pay some money, get some software, keep it forever. I'm sure there are other examples out there too. It does seem unlikely that any software like that will be as widespread as Windows 95 was, though.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: