200
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2026
200 points (99.5% liked)
PC Gaming
13859 readers
600 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You're contradicting yourself and not seeing it. You're universally saying it has absolutely no uses, and using your own experiences and others, as evidence. When counter-evidence is provided, you dismiss it because you can only speak from your own experiences.
Either other peoples experiences are valid, and you must accept that some people have found genuine uses for the technology, despite your hatred for the industry and the false marketing around it.
Or other peoples experiences are not valid, in which case there's no point in talking about anything, because you will not consider it valid unless you personally experience it.
This is what evidence looks like
Your experience is not evidence. It's an anecdote.
In a world where everyone and their fucking mother has been trying relentlessly to gaslight me into believing this for 3 fucking years, despite any and all available evidence, yes, I absolutely will not. I'm long past done entertaining the notion.
Actually, that's materially incorrect. You are making the universal claim that a technology has literally no uses, and every single person that claims otherwise is either ignorant, or has been grifted.
I am making the counter-argument that, while I agree with the overall concerns with misuse, and misrepresentation, claiming it has literally no use is objectively false.
Anecdotal would be "I've heard people have found uses for it." Or "My cousin says it helps him do XYZ."
I have given you a specific example of my own use. That is not anecdotal, that is a definitive, replicateable, counter point.
You have decided to dismiss it, because making a universal sweeping claim inherently requires the dismissal of all counter points in order to remain intact.
I'm sorry that you're so angry, and have convinced yourself the world is trying to gaslight you, that doesn't seem like a healthy belief. I won't be responding further.
Just FYI, at this point this guy has been provided 2 links on the Pyfed codeberg repository that show AI was used in the development of PieFed and he says he won't use anything that did, so any further replies from him make him a hypocrite for using software that used AI while being developed. He's a troll/wasting your time.
Yeah, I figured that was probably the case when I asked what evidence might change their mind, and the question was just ignored. Still, I was mildly entertained by pointing out their logical errors, so it wasn't a complete waste of my time lol.
Ya, that's fair. Both our separate conversations have merit and could maybe help people who aren't behaving like that.
No you're not. This claim has nothing to do with your personal experience. You are citing your personal experience as evidence. You're doing the exact same thing you're accusing me of, only I have provided actual evidence to back up my statements, and you haven't.
...yes? That's the definition of anecdotal.