If parasites were widespread amongst human beings, would those infected humans have incentive to study them?
We are likely biased and can't imagine how we are biased because of the infection! Yet the over-under for an individual is clear: try the medication and find out!
Many of these arguements are moot – because for any top-down function definition technique, the How to Design Programs recipe covers virtually all the bases.
Between a signature, purpose statement and examples, you've declared most of what documentation provides short of a longer contextual statement of the functions role in a codebase.
Greenspan's tenth law is that every language ends up with a half baked Common Lisp implementation. This is apparently true, with the stipulo that these implementations end up fully baked over time. This is true since functional programming languages are commonly research languages which mean industry languages catch up.
> Presumably if publishers were actually pressuring Microsoft to make a child-safe device, they'd have come up with a more advanced protection mechanism than that.
They did. For the next generation. They updated their model of "child safe".
The arguments against planned obsolescence are partially environmental. If planned obsolescence isn't going away, at least this aspect is improved. Consider medical disposables, or one-time packaging that still requires medium term storage survivability.
Someone should write a Wikipedia article on a glibly labeled law to the effect of, "any opportunity for forensic information to be exploited, will be done so."
There being an organic correlate for attention, for memory formation, for emotions and so on – it's likely that the beta-blockers makes certain intents easier to override others, rather than the causality being only one way.