I didn't say that I thought it was right, or fair, or just. I didn't say I liked it, or that I agree with it.
In fact, I think it's a pretty ugly state of affairs when a person in an area of poor connectivity needs to climb the hill/go into town/otherwise make plans before they can get their shiny new router to work.
I can accept that things are the way they are, or I can pretend that they're different.
Acceptance seems to be a lot more honest.
The implication that there is nothing anyone can do to improve the existing state of affairs is also incorrect.
I did not.
> That claim is in error.
My motivation to further discuss a hallucination is insignificant.
This is the exact quote:
> And at least for connected devices at home, a dedicated app can have lower friction for initial setup for the "I'm not a computer person" crowd than other alternatives do.
What good does it do you to dispute that you implied it as a justification for the status quo when your error is contained in the part you're not disputing?
> implied
Any implied meanings are your own creations, not mine.
I assure you that if I had meant something different than what I wrote, then I would have written something different instead.
I'm not shy.
Be well.