>The point is that “bad” isn’t a useful descriptor of anything regarding their real-life applications, because it simply doesn’t mean anything.
This is just a complicated way of saying "Bad things have no meaning and don't exist in the universe."
Without getting too pedantic, in general, nobody agrees with this concept. Sure if you get pedantic you may find a couple people in this world who enjoy punching themselves in the face, but in general the overwhelming majority agree that punching yourself in the face is a pretty bad thing.
Note: Punching yourself in the face is just an example of a universally "bad" thing. I'm not personally against punching yourself in the face, it's just something I came up with while writing this.
Maybe I failed to express myself properly, but my point is that saying “X is bad.” (emphasis on the period) is not really saying anything. It’s much more productive if you explain why, how and in what environment X is bad, either before or after, like I did in example #2.
In my experience when someone says “X is bad”, the response is often either “haha” (which the subject then changes), or “why” (which leads to person #1 actually saying what they want to say). I’m personally not interested in someone’s remarks about some technology completely devoid of context or nuance, and would rather hear about their opinion on such technology in tangible scenarios.
>Maybe I failed to express myself properly, but my point is that saying “X is bad.” (emphasis on the period) is not really saying anything.
This logic also works for "X is good." or "GraphQL is good". This doesn't really say anything either and is an equally garbage statement following your logic. But your biases focus on the "bad" because you have a bias towards GraphQL.
Either way I don't agree. Saying something like criminals are bad is not an invalid statement.
If you want an explanation you can ask for it. If you don't care to know about the explanation then you don't need to ask for it. But just because somebody makes a statement without an explanation doesn't automatically make it invalid.
For example "The plane is about to crash, please pull up." This is a statement without an explanation (emphasis on the period). Should I demand an explanation or comply without one? In your words, was this statement "really saying anything?" Yes it was.
When you come to threads on HN it's mostly people looking for confirmation of their biases. They don't realize it, but almost everyone is doing this. If you weren't biased you would ask for deeper explanations. You would try to unravel the other persons reasoning and understand it in such a way so that you find a mistake in his understanding or your own. That's mainly why I'm here, but this thread is littered with posts following the same logical path as you.
There are way too many assumptions in your post. Yes, you're right that I like GraphQL, but:
1) Nowhere in my comments did I say that's limited to negative comments. I think "GraphQL is good" is just as useful (meaning not at all).
2) "Criminals are bad" is not an invalid statement, and neither is "GraphQL is bad" or "GraphQL" is good. But if the purpose is to discuss criminality, and not just add noise to an ongoing discussion, it is also a useless statement. Imagine there's a debate panel going on, someone in the crowd stands up and says "criminals are bad!". Where does that lead the conversation?
3) "The plane is about to crash, please pull up" is an expression of fact, not an opinion, and not even something that warrants or is said in a discussion so I don't think the comparison makes sense. Either way, "GraphQL is bad" is an opinion, not a fact, and thus needs more context to be useful in a discussion.
I'm not going to acknowledge the last paragraph because I'm presuming good faith from you, and I'd rather not turn this discussion into speculation about other comments in this thread or why you're here.
That said, you're definitely right that I'm biased towards GraphQL, but I think we're having different discussions if you think we're discussing GraphQL's merits.
It's not about leading the conversation some place. He's under no obligation to lead the conversation to a place you want it to go. If someone says something different, I don't dismiss the statement. I follow up with a question. You didn't. YOu simply made a broad statement dismissing all queries saying "X is bad" as invalid and you think it's up to the person stating something to explain. No. If you want an explanation you ask for it. But the statement by itself isn't invalid.
However you completely dismissing the negative claim was invalid in my opinion.
>But if the purpose is to discuss criminality,
Obviously this is an example not a segway into criminal law. I am showing an example of a statement that is true independent of explanation. True statements are not to be ignored even when they lack explanations. That is the point.
>"The plane is about to crash, please pull up" is an expression of fact, not an opinion, and not even something that warrants or is said in a discussion so I don't think the comparison makes sense
You can't automatically say something is a fact. It's very possible things like this are an expression of opinion. The copilot observes sensor readings, he thinks we're about to crash. The pilot observes sensor readings he see's no such indication of an impending crash. This is a realistic possibility. The ounter to this is also true. You may assume GraphQL being bad is an opinion, but it's possible that it is a fact.
Let me elaborate on that. What if the person who hates GraphQL is actually expressing a universal fact? But like the pilot you have a differing opinion because you "misread" the sensor readings. Instead of taking the cautionary approach of pulling up and subsequently listening to the copilots reasoning you dismiss a statement because it has no explanation.
The point of this example is to show you a very obvious scenario where it's highly unwise to dismiss a possibly True statement simply because it lacked an explanation.
That is my point. You are dismissing a statement that has the possibility of being factually true. And you are saying you don't care whether or not it's true or not if the statement has not auto generated explanation you will dismiss it instead of inquiring further.
>I'm not going to acknowledge the last paragraph because I'm presuming good faith from you, and I'd rather not turn this discussion into speculation about other comments in this thread or why you're here.
fine. The point of me bringing it up is to not make this seem like a personal attack. But to frame my reply as a universal problem among all proponents of GraphQL that are responding in this thread. Basically i'm just reading people Gushing about how great GraphQL is and not exactly addressing why it's also despised by many on HN.
>That said, you're definitely right that I'm biased towards GraphQL, but I think we're having different discussions if you think we're discussing GraphQL's merits.
We aren't, not explicitly. I'm a neutral party with no opinion either way, I'm here to find a side to join. However reading your post and seeing that you're a proponent of GraphQL I'm criticizing your reasoning as unconvincing. Basically, Someone said GraphQL was bad, and your reasoning was all statements of the query "X is bad" should be dismissed.
I responded to explain to you why I didn't find your reasoning valid. That's all.
>The point is that “bad” isn’t a useful descriptor of anything regarding their real-life applications, because it simply doesn’t mean anything.
This is just a complicated way of saying "Bad things have no meaning and don't exist in the universe."
Without getting too pedantic, in general, nobody agrees with this concept. Sure if you get pedantic you may find a couple people in this world who enjoy punching themselves in the face, but in general the overwhelming majority agree that punching yourself in the face is a pretty bad thing.
Note: Punching yourself in the face is just an example of a universally "bad" thing. I'm not personally against punching yourself in the face, it's just something I came up with while writing this.