this doesn't mean that the paper is any good or doesn't deserve mockery (i don't know, i didn't read it yet, and i'm not sure i have apparatus to make other than esthetic judgements), just that the conclusions the og skeet author attributes to the paper aren't the paper's conclusions.
it's funny to contrast his lobsters comment to his banter on bluesky, where he feels less constrained and allows himself to be plain nasty (nora's blog is sephiroth-posting, nora has an axe to grind etc. etc.)
just to note that reportedly the palantir employees are for whatever reason going through a massive “hans, are we the baddies” moment, almost a whole year into the second trump administration.
as i wrote elsewhere, those people need to be subjected to actual social consequences of choosing to work with and for the u.s. concentration camp administration office.
ronacher is just the dude who couldn't understand why people call dhh a fascist after dhh wrote his fourteen-words-in-longform blog about london. (paraphrasing: sure, he said, that's not a good blog, but why would people say such terrible words about dhh.)
nothing formal, but the backlash to criticism is becoming absolutely disproportionate: for example, the person who made the list of slopware, kat marchán, was bullied off the social media by the slop merchants. this looks eerily similar to the right-wing braying about cultural war, where they call harassment any critique of their positions, and call a reasonable critique any harassment they do themselves.
(and just very recently the always very nice CTO and co-founder of the oxide company, a major rust shop, decided that shaming the promoters of the confabulation machines is not to be done at the company.)
and the slop promoters are still crying about the list being abuse; after succesfully abusing marchán out of the internet. one would think they know how to block, but no, they need to silence rather than block.
this doesn't mean that the paper is any good or doesn't deserve mockery (i don't know, i didn't read it yet, and i'm not sure i have apparatus to make other than esthetic judgements), just that the conclusions the og skeet author attributes to the paper aren't the paper's conclusions.