The Luddites weren’t anti-technology—they opposed machines that destroyed their livelihoods and benefited factory owners at workers’ expense. Their resistance was a critique of the social and economic chaos caused by the Industrial Revolution. Over time, “Luddite” became an insult due to capitalist propaganda, dismissing their valid concerns about inequality and exploitation. Seen in context, they were early critics of unchecked capitalism and harmful technological change—issues still relevant today.
It is quite literally what you said.
When most people say “Deciding what I said”, they would mean “making something up that I didn’t say” not “quoting me”.
I’m sorry that you think reality changes depending on what you want at any given moment.
Temp unblock as I am editing comments for undertandability. One last tip for you: When I encounter a misunderstanding I have made about what someone meant, I apologize, ask questions, and perhaps give some recommendations about how they might communicate that better. We all make typos and bad grammar judgments. Check through my thousands of comments and you will see dozens of examples of me working through miscommunications with others—both errors on mine and their end that we identify and engage with as unintentional imperfections.
What you do when you encounter a misunderstanding is: “Jesus Fucking Christ” “I’m sorry that you think reality changes depending on what you want at any given moment.” “It is quite literally what you said.”
These are poor communication skills and they hurt the people around you.
This is the third such argument we’ve had inside of, what, a month? In all three cases you’ve followed the same pattern of making disingenuous arguments, feigning ignorance, and then backpedaling and denying you made any arguments that had been sufficiently attacked.
Wrapping dogshit arguments in niceness doesn’t make the dogshit nicer. It devalues niceness.
I love that ‘quoting someone’ is ‘poor communication skills’ according to you.