[_glsb]

The whataboutism defense is absolutely failing at this point. If there was material criticism on HN of say Ubuntu or other providers for the same stuff Microsoft gets criticized your words might've been credible. But there isn't and they are not.

Pretending to be fair and objective is not the same thing as being fair and objective.

[alxlaz]

Whataboutism is a logical fallacy even when the "what about" thing doesn't get enough attention. If Ubuntu got more criticism on HN, would the ads you see on Windows become less intrusive, or more appropriate?

But FWIW, Ubuntu absolutely got, and still gets, plenty of criticism for that, even here on HN.

[_glsb]

Just like the "fallacy fallacy" is also a fallacy.

That's not the point I'm debating. Whether I'm OK with product design choices of Microsoft is my own consumer decision. But what really is getting old, is the utterly predictable and abysmal level of discourse on this matter on HN, Reddit or wherever.

My point is, that since the Internet has learned about whataboutism, it is being used to shut down any criticism of bias. In fact, your comment uses the common formula for that "Just because A does B, doesn't mean that C can do B."

Sure, but then your actions don't really correspond to your words. If you take the amount of privacy invasion in Android, for example, HN should be loosing their collective shit on a daily basis. They don't.

This is obviously just people emotionally bashing things they have been taught are outside of their "tribe".

And that has zero credibility.

[alxlaz]

I'm sorry but really none of this makes any sense to me.

How exactly did you reach the conclusion that "my actions don't really correspond to my words" based on how HN collectively treats Android? What actions are you talking about specifically? Using Android? I don't.

An how exactly does this post:

"I'm not sure how that's relevant here. Does my post say anything about what Ubuntu does being excusable in any way?"

follow this formula:

"Just because A does B, doesn't mean that C can do B."

My original reply said nothing about anything other than Windows, and my second post hinted that I think both Canonical and Microsoft are wrong in doing this. If I followed any formula, I'm pretty sure that's "neither A nor C should be doing B", which is as far removed from whataboutism as criticizing bias is removed from astroturfing.

[jevgeni]

> How exactly did you reach the conclusion that "my actions don't really correspond to my words" based on how HN collectively treats Android? What actions are you talking about specifically? Using Android? I don't.

I wasn't talking about you, the individual. It's a disembodied, collective "you" of HN. It's a rhetorical turn of phrase.

I don't know what to say to the rest. It's pretty obvious to me. If you don't get it, you don't get it.

Also, on astroturfing:

"Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message or organization to make it appear as though it originates from and is supported by grassroots participants."

????