It is actually not argumentum ad hominem, not least because this author is clearly not a person. It is extremely relevant to substance of this post that it was written by an LLM based on an anonymous Reddit commit (based on "reporting" itself written by Claude).

>If it’s clearly wrong then demonstrate.

Sorry, this does not work in the age of AI. If you don't bother writing your own words, then no one should bother responding to them.

It has been demonstrated as being wrong throughout this thread and the original threads about it.

The original report was AI slop from Claude Code. If you go to the repo it doesn’t even claim that Meta spent $2B, that’s just a sum of a lot of numbers Claude could find, not the number that Meta spent on lobbying this.