In other words, this is Atwood being Atwood: posting overly-simplistic, ignorant observations in a manner that manages to be only subtly wrong and hence dangerous. To a wide audience. That is receptive to his viewpoints.
It's harsh but over the last decade or so every, single damn time I read Atwood's blog I walk away shaking my head. The popular posts usually end up with him writing some sort of apology or retraction. Fortunately usually this is about something not nearly as serious an issue as suicide. (Though his posts on computer security are also notorious for causing proliferation of views that may actually cause real damage.)
When he posts stuff I don't think he intends these things but often I sadly see knowledgable people have to scramble and waste their time "cleaning up" after him by posting responses and getting those responses through the filter.
I would never post an over-simplistic, ignorant observation in a manner that manages to be only subtly wrong and thus dangerous. I go for completely wrong!
Ha. Well, if its any consolation, I don't see that post falling into the "dangerous" category. At worst you get nowhere at best you convince people to go work on diabetes software. Worst case for some of Atwood's posts is complete security breakdown at your favorite startup whose CTO is an avid reader of Coding Horror.
It's harsh but over the last decade or so every, single damn time I read Atwood's blog I walk away shaking my head. The popular posts usually end up with him writing some sort of apology or retraction. Fortunately usually this is about something not nearly as serious an issue as suicide. (Though his posts on computer security are also notorious for causing proliferation of views that may actually cause real damage.)
When he posts stuff I don't think he intends these things but often I sadly see knowledgable people have to scramble and waste their time "cleaning up" after him by posting responses and getting those responses through the filter.