For me the question is was the new (breaking) functionality announced when the package was updated. It appears to me it was thus I find no issue.
This is different then software announcing on the next release they will include ads or even a crypto miner as part of revenue generation
As long as the change is announced then there is no ethical issues and if you as the dev or user fail to read the updates of your depencacy tree well that is a failing on your part
There is no need to stick to your strawmen when we have real world actual examples. If you demand others only address your strawmen then you have recognized the weakness of your argument
>> Are you at fault because you have to, in theory, keep in control at all times?
Yes...
We already have examples of this with machinery that is automated. The Humans in charge of these automated machines are responsible for monitoring them, and have things like emergency shut downs, and various other safety protocols to shut them down when (not if When) they do unexpected things.
Machines are machines, they fuck up. The manufacturers are not held liable because the know these types of abnormal conditions exist they is why they have the safety protocols and human minders.
An example of this is the auto manufacturer i believe in TN or TX that did not train the operators properly on the safe way to operate, and lock out a machine, this failure to train lead to human injury. The manufacturer of the robot was not liable, the company that failed to train the human staff was.
That is marketing video from 2016, which many including the NTHSA criticized Tesla over, and which Tesla has updated documentation, driver prompts, and other marketing to reflect that the system is not "autonomous" infact if you look at the product pages they clearly say "full self-driving capabilities in the future—" this is also reflected by prompts to the driver, warnings to the driver, and the requirement that the driver provide feedback to the car they are in control...
I have long said that society has become such risk adverse that if someone invented a technology like the car today it would never be allowed in society.
I said this pre-COVID, and COVID has now cemented this idea, we will not accept any level of risk at all... None.
If it is not perfectly safe everything should be banned, locked down, or otherwise prohibited by law
The problem here is Tesla does not make the claim that the car is autonomous, in fact they clearly state otherwise, nor it is legal for any driver to operate the car like it was autonomous
To continue your analogy Chainsaw manufacturers include clear instructions, and directions to use safety PPE.. if a operator of the chainsaw fails to follow the instructions, or where the PPE and chops their leg off the manufacturer is not liable.. Hell even if they did follow the instructions and chop their leg off it would be unlikely the manufacturer would be liable.
Apple does not believe there are any electronics out side of Apple, nor that there are any web browsers outside of Safari.
Apple believe everyone on the plant should only ever use Apple hardware, and Apple Software, why would anyone not want to run over priced low quality products?
>>that doesn't mean I would invite most of them over for a beer, talk about politics, and still expect to have a good time.
The question is why? Because they would disagree with you? They would challenge your beliefs?
I am finding that more and more. People want agreement and echo chambers, not debates and arguments.
I love arguing politics, hell sometimes I will take a contrarian position just to have the contrarian position not because I believe / support it.
Debate and augmentation is how with strength our principles, our worldview, and solidify our beliefs as we age. As a society (in the US at least) we seem to be losing the ability to sit down with people that have different politics, have a heated debate/conversation, but then still walk away as friends or colleagues. that is very bad for society over all
>> would probably sit down and do some introspection.
What now? Not in the modern era. No one take personal responsibility for anything, everyone else must conform to their worldview, their opinions, their lifestyle... Period no discussion.
Nothing is wrong with them, everyone else is the problem
It would be funny if everyone thinks they used this sophisticated technology or supercomputer when in reality it was just someone with an excel workbook at ton of vba code
>>considering women playing video games only became socially acceptable a few years ago.
Ohh Please, I remember vividly playing my Grandmother in Sonic the Hedgehog on the original Sega Genesis many decades ago. That trope is just plain incorrect and a complete revisionist history
Typically the "RE" part does not mean "sit on a beach and do nothing"
For most people FIRE simply means being in a "position of Fuck You", which is very empowering and provides you with more options to seek out income opportunities that make you truly happy with out having to worry about paying the mortgage or putting food on the table
>> Facebook and Microsoft have both spent huge sums of money trying to and failed.
That does not mean it is not possible, it is not shocking to me that large institutions like Facebook and MS could not compete even with their deep pockets.
you seem to have conflated Money with creativity, and/or vision.
it will not be a Microsoft of Facebook that will topple twitch or you tube, it will be a startup of some kind that is completely removed from Corporate culture and the extreme chains on innovation that large companies have
Both Comcast and my current ISP both simply refuse to assist if you do not have their equipment. I have experiences both "Please hook up your ISP provided router and if you are still experiencing problems please call back"
Hell half the time they do not even help when you do have their equipment. It took me 3 months of calling support before my current ISP agreed to send a tech to look at my ONT that was clearly resetting itself, Tech replaced the ONT has not had any problems since.
ISP, all ISP's, customer service is terrible, there is not a ISP on the planet that has good service. Or atleast in the US
The support angle is the party line for why they want to own the boxes, but there has never been any actual data to back this up. Further I do not see this being a real problem, hell I use a custom router but if I have a problem I have hook up the ISP router to talk to customer service, I am fine with that.
The real reason they want this is 2 fold
1. Money. it is always money. They want to be able to advertise "Internet for only $30" but then tack on 20-30 in "other fees" to get that bill up, $5-10 for a router is an easy gain
2. Control. Companies like comcast have lots of control over the endpoints to the point where they can manipulate the firmware do do what ever they need for traffic management or even offer public wifi access to all your neighbors...
>>Why can’t pay taxes to an entity I prefer? Isn’t it a service?
No taxes are not a service. Taxes are a compulsory contribution to state revenue enforced by the threat of violence. One can not simply choose not to consume a service and thus not pay the "taxes" for that service.
The fact is that the government, like a mugger, says to a person: Your money, or your life. And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.
The government does not, indeed, waylay a person in a lonely place, spring upon them from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.
>>If everything is free market, why do we need government?
we do not need the modern "nanny state" central planning style of government, we need a basic frame work of law that is far far far more limited that what most consider the modern government to be and is based on lawful defense of life, liberty and property nothing more.
A person is composed of Life, faculties, & production aka individuality, liberty, & property
Each of us has a natural right to defend their person, their liberty, and their property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two.
The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.
Since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force for the same reason cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.
Governments that are granted more power / authority than the collective organization of lawful defense are unethical in their foundation and purpose
This is different then software announcing on the next release they will include ads or even a crypto miner as part of revenue generation
As long as the change is announced then there is no ethical issues and if you as the dev or user fail to read the updates of your depencacy tree well that is a failing on your part