You sit at the opposite of the spectrum, refusing with all your might that there might be something useful there at all. It's all just a BS generator that nothing, nothing at all useful can come out of, right? You might think you are a staunch critic and realist that no hype can touch and you see through all of it, when in fact your are wilfully ignorant.

Here's some BS for you.

That's an unfair mischaracterization of their position. Criticism doesn't equal rejection, and skepticism isn't the same as ignorance. Pointing out limitations, failures, or hype doesn't mean they are claiming there's nothing useful or that the entire technology is inherently worthless.

Being critical is not about denying all value—it’s about demanding evidence, accuracy, and clarity amid inflated claims. In fact, responsible critique helps improve technology by identifying where it falls short, so it can evolve into something genuinely useful and reliable.

What you're calling "willful ignorance" is, in reality, a refusal to blindly accept marketing narratives or inflated expectations. That’s not being closed-minded—that’s being discerning.

If there is something truly valuable, it will stand up to scrutiny.

> refusing with all your might that there might be something useful there at all

How does this follow from what I wrote? I addressed two very concrete points.