3 ms·
> You imply that, only because it's impossible to absolutely prevent all kinds of disasters, no efforts in safety should be taken at all. Not at all. We should
by vinceguidry 11y ago
> You imply that, only because it's impossible to absolutely prevent all kinds of disasters, no efforts in safety should be taken at all.
Not at all. We should absolutely work to make things safer. But we need to be realistic and temper our sense of idealism. Nothing was going to save this guy from disaster, if it wasn't 'rm' it just would have been something else.
My point is that you can't expect safety features to obviate the need to know what you're doing.
- jacobush 11y agoSounds very fatalistic. All people killed in car accidents would also have died from something else?
- TeMPOraL 11y agoMany probably would - it's likely that the insanely reckless attitude towards motor vehicles will also reflect in other areas of life.
- vinceguidry 11y agoI don't know exactly how you'd plan on fighting reality. The fact that this guy was going to get hosed eventually isn't some justification, it's fact. People who do stupid things get burned. If someone wants safety features, let them pay for them. If someone wants to add one, sure, so long as I can remove it if it gets in my way. Who knows, maybe they'll actually be worth having. But I'm not going to lose sleep over every idiot who ruins his life over something he didn't or couldn't learn about. There's absolutely nothing you can do to save stupid people from making stupid decisions. Maybe I remove a safety feature I don't need and hurt myself with it. Now I'm the moron. Hopefully I learn from it. Nothing you could have done about that either. Show me something foolproof, and I'll show you a greater fool.
- nickpsecurity 11y agoThis could've stopped it unless he specifically coded it to destroy system files: https://launchpad.net/safe-rm https://launchpad.net/safe-rm