I don’t think my reply was hostile, I just criticized your behavior assuming things, before you know the whole truth. I kept everything neutral and didn’t have the urge to have a discussion with someone already on edge. I hope you understand and also learn that not everything is entirely evil in this world. Please stay curious - don’t assume.
I just criticized your behavior assuming things, before you know the whole truth.
I didn’t assume anything. I asked you what your intended use case was and you responded with vague platitudes, sarcasm, and then once I pressed further, insults. Try re-reading your comments from a more objective standpoint and you’ll find neutrality nowhere within them.
(…) are you trying to help government agencies perfect spying? sounds very cringe ngl
Tell me again which part of your reply is telling me, you are actually interested in an objective discussion, without assuming things and wanting to start a fight for no reason.
I pointed out what I considered (and still consider) to be the most likely use for the tech you were describing, while asking you if that was your intention. A simple “no, actually I was thinking more about another use case” would have been a far more neutral and reasonable response. Instead, you assumed I was speaking in bad faith and responded in kind. You are the only one making assumptions or starting fights for no reason.
No, I didn’t think about that. If you did, why exactly were you so hostile to me asking what use you thought this might serve?
I don’t think my reply was hostile, I just criticized your behavior assuming things, before you know the whole truth. I kept everything neutral and didn’t have the urge to have a discussion with someone already on edge. I hope you understand and also learn that not everything is entirely evil in this world. Please stay curious - don’t assume.
I didn’t assume anything. I asked you what your intended use case was and you responded with vague platitudes, sarcasm, and then once I pressed further, insults. Try re-reading your comments from a more objective standpoint and you’ll find neutrality nowhere within them.
Tell me again which part of your reply is telling me, you are actually interested in an objective discussion, without assuming things and wanting to start a fight for no reason.
I struggle to find that part.
I pointed out what I considered (and still consider) to be the most likely use for the tech you were describing, while asking you if that was your intention. A simple “no, actually I was thinking more about another use case” would have been a far more neutral and reasonable response. Instead, you assumed I was speaking in bad faith and responded in kind. You are the only one making assumptions or starting fights for no reason.