[DannyBee]

Matt Stoller is often just trivially wrong. Like his arguments, and often "facts", rarely survive any sort of even mild scrutiny.

At one point i wrote a detailed point-by-point rebuttal of where either his facts or his arguments were just wrong, for like 10 of his articles, but i eventually gave up.

He doesn't even really try. I just decided i'm not the target audience. The target audience is either people who already agree with Matt Stoller and want to feel like they are right, or people who can't be bothered to do even a trivial amount of research.

He's definitely not convincing anyone else.

[azemetre]

Saying their arguments are bad but the dog ate your response isn't exactly convincing either.

[DannyBee]

Feel free to look at my comment history on matt's previous articles, like i've said, i've done point by point before if that's what you want.

I'm just not spending the time to do it anymore because after doing it a lot, matt doesn't ever get better. It's always just the same garbage.

Past a certain point, it's just not worth engaging with garbage anymore, and it's not reasonable to say "well you didn't engage with his garbage this time, so therefore you lose/are wrong by default".

No, actually, past a certain point, the onus is on him to stop producing garbage before anyone has to waste their time engaging.

While i did go point by point for a while (years actually) on his articles, I finally gave up when he started writing articles about the early days of android, and asserting lots of things, and I was actually there and doing the work with a small number of others, so i know why certain things were done because either I decided them, someone i know very closely decided them, or I was in the room when it was decided. As usual, Matt simply asserts his own set of facts, and when pressed for sources, it turns out he has none. It's just his own views, masquerading as fact. But that doesn't stop him at all! He'll just assert facts that are convenient to him and when pressed for sources just ignore or move on to the next target. Always another BIG newsletter to write!

This is of course, independent with whether i agree or disagree with any of his particular views - there are plenty of people i disagree with who i would happily point you at on antitrust if you want it, becuase despite our disagreements, at least they aren't making up facts and writing soothsaying garbage based on it.

[asdfasvea]

>>>Feel free to look at my comment history on matt's previous articles

Feel free to post one simple link for us.

You can't do that but you can follow the above sentence with 1000 more words?

[nickff]

>"Feel free to post one simple link for us.

You can't do that but you can follow the above sentence with 1000 more words?"

Feel free to use a word counter.

The post above yours has about 286 words after the sentence you quoted. Quite ironic for you to criticize the grandparent when you're being even lazier.

Here's how you can find the relevant comments: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...