pseud

You’re also the one indulging in hyperbole and gross universal generalisations, hence, you’re the very pseud you're decrying.

If, as you say, processed food equals junk food, being against it doesn't seem pseud-science to me.

Arranging books in shelves by color is the biggest pseud tell out there.

Destroying that record in one place pseud/anonymisises the record across the system.

Satoshi is the only very high profile person I’m aware of to remain completely (pseud)onymous.

Anyone saying otherwise is a pseud using words they don't understand.

Popper is a pseud who is popular with other pseuds.

The problem with this kind of pseud-scientific eso stuff is, that it relies purely on anecdotal evidence — anectdotal evidence by people who want to believe in it.

I think he's a pseud with no real connection to AI research.

SHA by design maps similar strings pseud-randomly.

It's been said that many dynamic languages have taken deep hints from lisp, so no surprise it's pseud-metalevel call protocol (apply fun <list>) is close to ruby and python ones.

Enough that I'm not a pseud trying to imply that I read a lot of super duper hard books as evidence that my midwit opinion on emdashes is better than the guy here who made me mad by criticizing them.

Aside from that there is some boring pseud posturing to "subvert expectations" by calling attention to itself for being different (than what people actually like).

Speculation around "hard steps" is pseud naval gazing until we gather more datapoints.

If you want to find more of this kind of judgment, you can look online for "pseud" or "midwit" as a signpost; alternatively, "literature"...

I do happen to find that sort of thing way more cough interesting cough than the whole "howdy stranger, are you AI or just a pseud" routine that HN posters seem to get such a huge kick out of.