It certainly looks more correct than a response like this, normally you'd expect a counter point instead of just doing whatever it is you are doing.
evil-olive's comment includes citations for fake information like the "nanometer" feature size of the chips. everyone knows those numbers are meaningless! they have no relation to the chips' ability to survive radiation in any configuration! but evil-olive adds the citation chaff knowing HN will upvote to avoid feeling bad about having to disagree with a strident "absolutely never going to happen" claim.
I'd agree and that's what I was sort of commentating about - just a flat "you are wrong" is harder to do in a space where the answer isn't manifestly obvious.
On Grahams hierarchy of disagreement, your comment is 3 tiers lower than the parent comment.