He doesn't have a point. He has whataboutism. So I decided to address his whataboutism by pointing out that Google is honestly even worse at what he is talking about, and thus his whataboutism is in fact invalid. So in a roundabout way I did address his "point".
You certainly have an interesting perspective on what you did there.
That comment would be equally as worthwhile and useful if you had started it with some other form of bias to justify it like "Wait, a woman who is black ...."
If your comment starts with some form of "well you are an x so ...", it's probably not actually addressing anything other than your own interesting biases against people.
Or you know, just dismiss whatever you want with bias and claims of whataboutism.
I guess that works too!
Despite your claim of whataboutism, i'm instead showing the author is incredibly conveniently eliding large parts of actual history in trying to make their point.
You may want to argue those shouldn't matter (or make it worse). That's at least a more valid argument than you made.
I would argue if you asked most people they do in fact matter because the world is not an abstract idealist paradise.
The internet definitely never has been in the past, so saying it isn't in the future is not particular interesting.
