The fallacy starts with an extreme argument to hook people (the $2B number in the headline) but then retreats to a different argument when the hook is shown to be questionable or wrong.
I do not support this law and I’ve been a spoken critic of age verification on HN. However I think articles like this are not helping the cause. They’re so easy to disprove that they become strawman arguments for the other side. Opponents can dismiss their critics are liars because headlines like this $2B number are so easily shown to be false.
The fallacy starts with an extreme argument to hook people (the $2B number in the headline) but then retreats to a different argument when the hook is shown to be questionable or wrong.
I do not support this law and I’ve been a spoken critic of age verification on HN. However I think articles like this are not helping the cause. They’re so easy to disprove that they become strawman arguments for the other side. Opponents can dismiss their critics are liars because headlines like this $2B number are so easily shown to be false.