Hacker News Reader

Most journalism tip-toes around this line by declining to assert direct cause. They use terms like “after” instead of “because” as it specifically does not imply a link, only the order in which two events (possibly related) occurred. Others you might see, “experts say” and “possible link”.

I’m not commenting on the ethical implications of this usage, only the specific mechanisms they use to avoid assigning cause in the event that they end up wrong.

Yeah when was this, Augh 14th?

> 160k People Die in USA After Cruise Robotaxi...

Someone died. Stop and think about that for a bit and tone down the stupid "but logic!" BS. Recognize that we don't know exactly what happened and it's worth digging into. This is a great time to practice empathy instead of stroking your ego.

I agree.

The intent is the link them together.

"Man dies after brushing teeth in morning." <- Might be true, but completely useless and irrelevant.

Isn't there a link between the taxi and the ambulance person?