"How many posts on every thread of this stock have you made in...

"How many posts on every thread of this stock have you made in this week alone insinuating that anyone who holds this stock that doesn't, for example hold an engineering degree specialising in Ai , has no reason to invest in a stock that is in this field?"

This is your interpretation, but it is not something I have ever said. Can you produce evidence to support your accusation?

I have called out posters when they make technical claims such as:

- "In terms of function, the Akida AKD1500 appears to be one of the most, if not the most, advanced Edge AI platform available..." or
- "there is no competition", or
- Brainchip's Edge AI IP provides the most advanced, efficient and quickest option for companies to move into this space...simply no equivalent platform", or
- "The next Renesas chip with 5G and Akida AI accelerator will be the game changer. It will raise the bar in the edge AI space and Qualcomm and others will need to match" or etc etc,

and ask how they are able to make these claims without a relevant technical background. Perhaps you can explain why you disagree with me?

People who have been making these sort of claims have also acknowledged they do not have a relevant technical background. As a result this seems to fall squarely within the Dunning-Kruger effect does it not?

I have also claimed it is much more likely retail investors will blindly believe online ramping when they don't have a relevant technical background as it is then difficult to critically analyse the ramping. Do you also disagree with this?