On a serious note, you should learn about Graham’s number, it’s legit mind-blowing.

I will typically use the terms asynchronous and parallel when discussing the concepts, but I hadn’t thought about using multitasking until I saw that comment. I mean, even C# calls them “tasks”.

A comment on the YouTube video makes a good point that we already have a better word for the concept of dealing with multiple things at once: multitasking. Using a word that literally means “things happening at the same time” just adds to the confusion, since people already have a difficult time understanding the distinction between multitasking and concurrency.

I’ve tried using SFC multiple times and had it work zero times. One time after SFC failed to find anything wrong, I ended up fixing the machine by replacing the system file with a copy from a working machine.

I mean, it basically is a poop knife that can reach further down inside the toilet.

Yeah, I’ve had to help a neighbor with that 1 time out of 100. The plunger was just causing the water to slam against the turd that had created a perfect seal and splash back outside the toilet. It probably took at least 5 uses with the auger to finally clear out enough crap to finally break it apart enough to let it flush.

Fortunately, the second time I helped them with a nearly identical situation, the plunger worked. But it still took a few forceful plunges in quick succession. I was worried I might have to use the auger again.

I’ve been using ForwardEmail, and have been happy with them so far. Their free tier only allows aliasing, but the cheapest paid tier is only $3/month, and you can use Thunderbird/K-9 as your mail client.

Thanks, I had considered linking a reference, but I didn’t think he was disputing the definition. He was disputing my analysis that this was a valid example of the fallacy.

Maybe I have the wrong fallacy, or I’m just really stretching on this one.

This was my line of thinking:

• premise = there are no valid reasons to dislike X
• conclusion = people who dislike X don’t have any valid reasons

Begging the question is a logical fallacy that assumes the conclusion within the premise. If OP was not being genuine, then the faulty conclusion would be “there are no good reasons to dislike GrapheneOS, therefore why do people dislike GrapheneOS?”

It’s very close to begging the question, though. It really depends on OP’s actual intent, which is hard to determine through text. But it does seem like it could have a, “Those of you who still hate GrapheneOS, why are you wrong?” tone to it.

Edit: Reading through OP’s comments, they do sound genuine to me, I’m mostly just explaining why someone might mistake the post for begging the question.