Log in | Sign up

That last bit made me chuckle. Sorry if made it harder to disentangle.

You’re doing it again, telling ME what I THINK

I struggle to find any text that I wrote that supports this assertion.

I am not an AI supporter. That’s all I want to make clear.

All I’m saying is that if you want to make that clear, maybe arguing on a technicality on an anti-AI post muddies the water a bit. Read the room a bit.

Also, if you want to win back the room, apology lands better than defensiveness.

I am not sorry for anything,

Like I say, that’s not winning you any friends, and of you blame everyone else but yourself for the reaction to what you said, you will continue to get similar reactions in the future.

because I never had a problem with what you claim my problem is

I claim that your problem is that disagreeing with a moderately popular anti AI post on a technicality got folks arguing with you and you aren’t well placed to handle the fallout.

I am fundamentally being misunderstood and that’s what pisses me off

As someone who is upset at people misunderstanding them, you’re sure spending a lot of energy complaining about what you assume I think about your viewpoint on AI, when in fact I believe I made no claim or assumption whatsoever about what you believe about AI, just about what you said and how you said it.

I don’t care if you disagree.

And yet here you are, getting upset that people didn’t like what you said.

My pet peeve is being told what I think and what I am

Then may I suggest that disagreeing with people on a technicality isn’t going to end well for you, and you’re going to need a thicker skin if you do.

Also, if you want to win back the room, apology lands better than defensiveness.

You can’t take constructive criticism?