>>To make an argument of this scale you have the burden of proof. There is no proof here past casual correlation.

And yet, as of this writing, it has 200+ upvotes and is at the top of the front page.

HN audience really needs to do better. If you are reading this and are one of the people who upvoted the story, please really ask yourself why.

Oh this is normal. People upvote the title, then comment, then read it if the comments aren’t agreeing with their preconception. Humans are a mess of a species.

Sounds like a design issue. Why does the front page have an upvote button if we expect people to read the post/article first?

Interesting point. Perhaps if you click through the upvote button shouldn’t appear until 5 minutes later?

Because some people check the linked article only and might never look at the comments.

There isn't a website on the planet that allows for votes where it doesn't very often happen that they provide a viewport into the boundless stupidity of the human species.

I wonder how H.N. and similar websites would work if ranking was purely a function of activity and not of votes — simply push to the top whichever branch of the tree has the last reply so highly debated news is statistically more often at the top, but whichever link had the last reply somewhere will be currently at the top.

Chrome lives in the causal consumer world.

Many of us believe, with some justice, the causalization of computers has been to the diminishment of power users.

Therefore chrome bad gets hundreds of upvotes. I guarantee you not everyone read the entire article, and then ran their own diagnostic CPU benchmarking to verify the results, and also compared it against chrome competitors.

It's more like the common folk like chrome, and chrome ruin PCS for us

I surely hope chrome lives in a causal world, a non-aristotelian world would be confusing. (Just me being an ass, I know you meant casual)