Because the second sentence is inflammatory.

The side comment is right, it's about low versus high trust societies. Even if GP made a mistake on which names are relevant, they're not being racist about it.

▲

nyc_data_geek1 a day ago | parent | next [-]

That's one opinion. Here's another - they were waiting with their commentary locked and loaded, and failed to even read the source material in any detail before unloading it.

They're making broad assertions about specific societies, when those assertions are in this instance in no way related to TFA.

▲

2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

titanomachy 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, on looking more closely it’s possible that they made an honest mistake.

▲

nyc_data_geek1 14 hours ago | parent [-]

In that case, the edit button exists. It seems rather late in the day to be erring on the side of the benefit of the doubt in every case, for things like this. Much of the population is unabashedly, vociferously, aggressively racist and proud of it, these days.

	▲	Dylan16807 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> In that case, the edit button exists. It seems rather late in the day to be erring on the side of the benefit of the doubt The edit button exists for 2 hours and this is not a person that frequently comments. > That's one opinion. Here's another - they were waiting with their commentary locked and loaded, and failed to even read the source material in any detail before unloading it. Well almost a day later they replied "you can google the papers and find the arxiv articles where the authors are listed". Unless that is a blatant lie, it seems like a pretty good reason to think they're using good-faith and non-racist reasoning here.