4 ms·

Consider this bit of 'cleverness:" Encode music CDs with a Windows rootkit that prevents copying of unencrypted music from said CDs, phones home, and otherwise

Consider this bit of 'cleverness:" Encode music CDs with a Windows rootkit that prevents copying of unencrypted music from said CDs, phones home, and otherwise helps 'protect music owner's IP from piracy.' Do we not fault the creator and instead fault the companies that buy it? Here's a horse I have been beating for several decades: "Fault" or "Blame" does not obey the laws of conservation. Just because we blame Alice for failing to check her blind spot before making a lane change doesn't mean we absolve Bob of fault for ignoring her turn signal. It's reprehensible to make and sell this stuff. It's also self-defeating to buy and deploy it.

cujo 16y ago
To the car analogy. That's exactly what it means. As a driver I have no obligation to honor your request to change lanes. It is your obligation to decide if moving sideways into my car is the right move. In the above case, and in tynt's they aren't doing anything wrong. It is more analogous to gun control, without the dire consequences of misuse.
- raganwald 16y ago
  > As a driver I have no obligation to honor your request to change lanes. It is your obligation to decide if moving sideways into my car is the right move. Please don't stick to "the letter of the law" in Ontario. I respect your right to have an opinion about this, but would despair if such a choice resulted in injuries or death. In Ontario we have no-fault insurance for exactly this reason. If you choose not to respect someone else's signal and an accident results, you are both getting dinged for the cost of repairs. Your failure to "drive defensively" is your fault, regardless of the official rules for right-of-way. Fault is only of interest if the police end up laying certain types of criminal charges. You might escape fault if the other driver runs a red and hits you. You will not escape fault if you see another driver signal a lane change and you have time to slow down and allow them to change lanes. If someone changes lanes into you and you had no reasonable chance to react, you're possibly off the hook. But there's really no reason to see someone signal a lane change and bull right through without being very certain that they know you're there and plan to wait for you to proceed.

cujo 16y ago

To the car analogy. That's exactly what it means. As a driver I have no obligation to honor your request to change lanes. It is your obligation to decide if moving sideways into my car is the right move. In the above case, and in tynt's they aren't doing anything wrong. It is more analogous to gun control, without the dire consequences of misuse.

raganwald 16y ago
> As a driver I have no obligation to honor your request to change lanes. It is your obligation to decide if moving sideways into my car is the right move. Please don't stick to "the letter of the law" in Ontario. I respect your right to have an opinion about this, but would despair if such a choice resulted in injuries or death. In Ontario we have no-fault insurance for exactly this reason. If you choose not to respect someone else's signal and an accident results, you are both getting dinged for the cost of repairs. Your failure to "drive defensively" is your fault, regardless of the official rules for right-of-way. Fault is only of interest if the police end up laying certain types of criminal charges. You might escape fault if the other driver runs a red and hits you. You will not escape fault if you see another driver signal a lane change and you have time to slow down and allow them to change lanes. If someone changes lanes into you and you had no reasonable chance to react, you're possibly off the hook. But there's really no reason to see someone signal a lane change and bull right through without being very certain that they know you're there and plan to wait for you to proceed.