Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It didn't say that it was not factual, it said is not a scientific fact, which is objectively true. You can still believe it and agree with this statement.

The bigger problem is it appears to have tried to evaluate the statement itself when it should have just done a pure text search and treated the quote as an arbitrary character string.



That's true, but a non sequitur. They didn't ask whether it was true, they asked what it was a quote from.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: