From XDA

    • King@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      8 months ago

      Dont make them then, I showed how that one was shit in 2 different ways

      • Aatube@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        What kind of Linux distro has ASCII art on the desktop by default? you’re making stuff up

        Analogies are made to be made up

          • Aatube@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            The things we are comparing are a math book with a 1+1=3 on its cover and an article with a thumbnail of a linux desktop with ascii art on the background. If we ditch the default talk, then I can also just plaster a 1+1=3 on my math book and it won’t be misinformation

            • King@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              8 months ago

              So you think mentioning both ascii art and a linux distro somehow counts as misinformation?

              • Aatube@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Well, its at the same level as 1+1=3 and a math book. It’s not claimed to be truth, but it uses a very inappropriate pop-appropriation to try and grab your attention

                • King@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  using = literally indicates a claim, showing some art does not, you just assume shit and claim it as reality. I guess u also believe showing kali logo while not explicitly mentioning it in the article counts as " a very inappropriate pop-appropriation "? Get a grip