• Ryru Grr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Even the tldr bot forwards such a heavy bias into the delivery of this information, I couldn’t even get through it without eye-rolling. I’d like to receive the info, and then be allowed to think for myself.

    This isn’t journalism - it’s a thirsty-for-validation, one-sided take on this topic. This proposal may not be viable in a vacuum, but there may be some interesting ideas that can be taken from it, when the reader isn’t being spoonfed the psyche of an author that clearly wants you to agree with them. Like I said - I’d rather either hear both sides fairly, or get the info without it already dripping with the stank of another person’s very negative opinion. Whether or not you agree with me, as long as you’re thinking for yourself, you’re doing it right.

    Edited first sentence for clarity.

    • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with you that the article isn’t neutral but I feel like after that dumbfuck manifesto, no one should have to treat anyone at Andreeson Horowitz seriously again.