[estimator7292]

Would you like to offer a rebuttal more well reasoned and thought out than "nuh-uh"?

You have the entire collected knowledge of mankind at your fingertips. You could do 30 seconds of research and find an answer better than "I don't think that sounds right".

[gjm11]

What is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

(The form in which Christopher Hitchens actually stated "Hitchens' Razor" is more symmetrical but unfortunately wrong: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". Anything can be asserted without evidence! It's only when something actually has been, in a given context, that dismissing it is -- in the same context -- a reasonable course of action.)

[fc417fc802]

While a reasonable principle I don't think it applies in context. People aren't expected to exhaustively source comments on HN. There's subjective etiquette to it.

In this case it would be reasonable to inquire about the basis of the original remark, or to reject based on personal knowledge, or to reject based on a concrete citation. But an arbitrary non-technical vibes based rejection doesn't fit with how things generally work here.

[Braxton1980]

True but you can provide evidence to increase the quality of your claim.

[loloquwowndueo]

> You could do 30 seconds of research

So could you, right?