Wow.

  • poke
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I have not finished reading the article, but “Receipt 1” is just embarrassing to GN in my eyes. They claim LMG never addresses the plagierism and provides an email chain where Linus tell him what exactly LMG is going to do in response and GN responds indicating the solution is good. Where is the problem?

    Specifically on publicly addressing it, Linus said they will pin a comment and Steve said that’s OK. That’s what happened. Is it truly unresolved? Just reading the emails provided makes it really look like an open and closed case.

    I also dont get why they include the additional context in that part of their response. What does GN’s recent criticism of LMG have to do with that interaction?

    Sorry, on mobile and just had to type something out before I forgot, because this is a long read.