> Many others in this thread have pointed out IBM's achievements but regardless, IBM is far from "zero for three".

I was specifically commenting in the context of this thread.* I was not trying to characterize either IBM or Meta except with reference to the arguments offered by this thread’s ancestors.

I understood (and understand) that such scorekeeping of a company as storied as IBM is at best reductive and at worst misrepresentative.

* Your reference to “this thread” actually addresses sibling comments to OP (ggggp), not this thread which was started by gggp.