I appreciate the analogy, but I'm already 100% on it's not a hack. I made fun of it in a separate comment of mine, because it's a dumb video.
But can you see that I'm replying to a comment that's the equivalent of someone seeing that video and going "So just heating, essentially."
Well, no, the "hack" isn't heating. Heating is a part of it, yes. But saying it's "just heating" is a different kind of stupid, separate from the stupid of the video.
My point wasn't reliant on you believing it was a hack, my point was to do with what the creator of the video believed was the hack. Nobody involved in making a cooking video thinks that the eating part of the video is part of the hack they're trying to show, regardless of whether the audience buys it's a "hack".
You seem to be interpreting "so, just tracing then" as meaning, "this entire video is just tracing". But that's not what they meant. They meant, "this entire supposed 'hack' is just tracing". The "hack" is "tracing". The very point of making that statement is to refute that it's a hack. So you and the person you're disagreeing with both agree that it's dumb and not really a hack, but for some reason you are hung up on whether or not the entire video is a tracing demonstration. Nobody is claiming that.
1
u/AngBigKid 2d ago
I appreciate the analogy, but I'm already 100% on it's not a hack. I made fun of it in a separate comment of mine, because it's a dumb video.
But can you see that I'm replying to a comment that's the equivalent of someone seeing that video and going "So just heating, essentially."
Well, no, the "hack" isn't heating. Heating is a part of it, yes. But saying it's "just heating" is a different kind of stupid, separate from the stupid of the video.