Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> If fossil fuels were so bad for the planet, nobody would use them. If super-processed fast food was so bad, nobody would eat it. If wars were so bad, nobody would fight in them. Do you sense where the problem with your argument is, or do I need more examples?

You mention these things as if they had only downsides. They do not. Fossil fuels have lots of advantages: high energy density, good storability, easy transport. Otherwise we would not have any problem getting rid of them.

Same for ultra processed food: it is cheap to make, addictive, has long shelf life so can be easily stored and shipped around the world, and all of that makes them very profitable.

Same for wars: some people or entities (companies, countries, etc) do profit from them (or at least hope or plan to profit).

So yeah, even things you find personally disgusting have some purpose, at least to some people. It’s also the case for YAML, as for all things. Comparing YAML to fossil fuels or wars is unhelpful hyperbole. We should be able to take a deep breath and discuss these things rationally like adults.



The argument was much more simple: popular doesn't mean good (for whatever metric you are using to measure it).

No need to look for reasons why something bad is also good. That's not the point. Hitler was a vegetarian and had some other commendable character traits. None of which make him a good person.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: