this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
806 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

81532 readers
4872 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your comments now are a huge shift from

"That sounds like problematic use," the Instagram boss answered. He did not call it an addiction.

He also didn’t say it was a tomato.

Seems that, in the interest of accuracy, you should update them, lest you be the thing you claim others are.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I recommend a re-read, my good buddy, of all my posts in this thread.

Truth. Not lies. Not conjecture.

This can be the truth that he was dodging the question.

Don’t say people said things they didn’t say. Simple.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your original post was a lie, or dumb accident, through omission. And now that you know better, you are lying intentionally in it.

You know damn well they were talking about addiction and not tomatoes. And yet you dishonestly tell people those two things are the same.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Did the douchebag say exactly what the post title said he said?

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Have you walked back your lie comparing the actual topic of addiction to the irrelevant topic of tomatoes? Make sure you post an explicit correction along with an apology.

"If the truth isn't enough, I don't want it." Please demonstrate.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You support lying. Good to know.

If you don’t understand the tomato comment, no wonder you’re having so much trouble with the interpretation and lying topics!

[–] XLE@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's no way you can say that the inquiry was about tomatoes as much as it was about addiction. Not without being incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest.

You are now intentionally leaving out multiple paragraphs of content that would prove the opposite, which adds to your deception.

Demonstrate a grain of honesty by fixing your lies and maybe you'll have a right to talk.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You really don’t understand and are just driving the point home the more you post. I feel kinda sorry for you.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Please defend your use of your lying false equivalency. Demonstrate your wisdom, Truth Seeker.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

What do you think my original point was?

Yours was essentially “it doesn’t matter if he said addiction or not, he was dodging the question. All the evidence points towards him claiming that much usage is not an addiction.”

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I told you what your point was. Over and over. And I told you how you were misleading (and now, just intentionally dishonest). Quite a few people seem to understand exactly what I told you.

So if you think there's a communication issue, it's on your side to fix.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You got it wrong and aren’t willing to recognize that. The fact that you can’t even paraphrase my point (no matter how wrong you think I am) shows just how out of your depth that you are.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The stupid/malicious dichotomy just keeps coming up with you, huh. How did you miss the explanations? Ditto for your original wrong comment.

Even if you think you are right, o arbiter of truth, apparently dozens of people disagree with your take when shown context. That's on you bro. Go fix it.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

How can you be arguing with someone and not even know what their position is? No, none of your prior posts come close.

Naw, screw “know” - you’re fucking clueless. You have no idea and are screaming into the wind.

[–] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Even if you think you are right, o arbiter of truth, apparently dozens of people disagree with your take when shown context. That's on you bro. Go fix it.

[–] Analog@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago

You’re out here swinging on a straw man if you can’t restate what you think my position is, and have it be remotely accurate. Which, so far, you’re not even close.

Did I summarize your position well enough? Any clarifications?