Maybe, just maybe, they factored in supply chains, costs and re-engineering effort and decided that it can happen later.
Sometimes you wonder why such speculative (not to mention defensive) articles get on the front page on HN. Aren't we supposed to be more rational and balanced?
> Aren't we supposed to be more rational and balanced?
Reddit has the same misconception. In reality, voting-based aggregators are at the whims of the user's personal feelings and preconceived beliefs, no matter the community guidelines.
HN has one nice benefit in that misleading titles can be changed, which I greatly appreciate.
Sometimes you wonder why such speculative (not to mention defensive) articles get on the front page on HN. Aren't we supposed to be more rational and balanced?