[throw10920]

> Okay, so you're a hyper capitalist. Good, I dig that. Me too.

Nothing in GP's comment gave any indication that they were a "hyper capitalist". You're just being emotionally manipulative, disingenuous, and acting in bad faith. This is categorically inappropriate for HN.

[frank_nitti]

Hmm well I certainly inferred the same from their comment: it casts “big tech” as the victim of the government, because the latter forced as “overpriced and shitty solution”

It’s possible they’re not a capitalist and just extremely sympathetic to Apple and/or Google specifically, but that seems more of a stretch than what that commenter (to whom you’re replying) has inferred IMO

[throw10920]

Your assumption is equally incorrect, because the poster factually did not say anything like that. You can be upset at the EU for making performative regulation without addressing "real issues" or writing the regulation well, and yet still support strong regulation. The implication that criticizing the EU is equivalent to being a "hyper-capitalist" is such an insane belief that it borders on being farcical.

Assumptions like this are what lead to political polarization. Don't do it. Read what the poster wrote, don't try to read their mind, and use your brain responding.

[darkwater]

Reading the original comment, I would say that's you giving it a creative interpretation.

[throw10920]

Reading my previous comment, anyone with decent reading comprehension can tell that I'm describing a possible interpretation. I'm clearly not assigning it as fact, as echelon is.

I can also explain exactly why echelon's interpretation is unfounded, yet you cannot make any coherent argument and are forced to resort to allusions and baseless accusations stemming from a failure to read what I wrote. Although, that's consistent with a failure to read what ralph84 wrote, too.