Sorry, read the section on Google in the article which finishes with "Google is nothing but a series of infringements snowballed together", and tell me again that this demands a serious response.
If you post an inept trolling article you are likely to get an antagonistic response.
If it doesn't demand a "serious response," why respond at all? If it is a poor example of Hacker News, ignore it. If it isn't Hacker News, the flag link is right up there. Posting ad hominems and then complaining about the article's content is a little like telling me, "Dad, she started it!"
I know for a fact that you are capable of better, and so is everyone else that chooses Hacker News over Reddit.
Leaving this specific example aside, don't you think it's insightful to get a background of the author when reading one of his articles? Especially parts of the background that pertain to the subject being written about?
Usually you'd be right, but roughlydrafted is an exception. I hate to apply the "fanboy" sobriquet, but he has earned it. The guy has never written a measured, well-considered sentence in his life. Once this ceases to be the case, there will be a HN headline: "Daniel Dilgar no longer batshit loon!" Until then, feel safe to ignore anything from that URL.
Edit: Three points.
* He has a series of whiny/smug youtube videos defending the ipad's flaws http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wpjK60io0E
* He has a book on OS X that he makes money off.
* He also mentions in another video that he owns Apple shares.