[gleenn]

I think your phrase choice is also quite funny. Obviously a fact isn't physically stolen, it has been surveilled and sold to the highest bidder. Every fair chance a competitor had to offer you something better was taken from you, it just wasn't done in front of your face. And that data is becoming more and more valuable as we speak as all this AI data race heats up.

[tomComb]

> and sold to the highest bidder.

Yikes, you are doing it too. Does accuracy in prose not count anymore?

When you have a strong case you shouldn’t have to bend the facts.

[gleenn]

Google Adwords is quite literally using the data they have harvested from you and selling ad placements based on it to the highest bidder in its ad auction system. There was zero hyperbole in that statement.

[tomComb]

> using the data they have harvested from you and selling ad placements

You changed what you wrote to make it accurate now, but refused to admit that and instead just prepended it with "literally"!

Wonderfully ironic given that we are talking about being accurate in your writing!

[gleenn]

Can you please be specific what I changed? I meant every single word exactly in the first post as in the second. Both are completely accurate. What exactly did I change with any substance?

[tomComb]

You said the fact was sold to the highest bidder, which implies that they sell your data. Which is something that most people believe because people use language like you have. But it isn’t true.

The second time you were much more accurate. You wouldn’t have even had to restate it differently if the first time had been accurate.