Most of this thread is a joke (thanks for the entertainment so far).
Why explain a concept with a triangle which every child has to learn at school (don’t tell my you forgot about Pythagoras) when you can model it as multiple bidirectional relationships which need to be gobbled together to make sense at all?
This is a generational issue, not a photographic one.
Old farts who grew up on film still carry that anxiety with them, and they were so restricted by using film with a set ISO value that they are still jealous about easily bumping up the ADC. As film was not practically exchangeable between each exposure it wasn’t that relevant.
Young shits couldn’t care less about these facts, and just carelessly move on with their lives while they are happily exposing. They disrespect the previous definitions while inventing new ones which are based on false assumptions, and still need to be ironed out, with an uncertain outcome.
It’s always two steps forward, one step back (except in photography where you would have an unsharp image with that technique without refocusing).
So far I’ve seen two arguments basically repeating the same thing over and over again.
I hope you realize that you are talking about different things: exposure and appropriate exposure.
And now please don’t let me start to talk about trap rappers exposing themselves.