> can't say an idea is bad without providing a solution ... engineers who do that are bad People try to do impossible things all the time, and saving a lot of

> can't say an idea is bad without providing a solution ... engineers who do that are bad People try to do impossible things all the time, and saving a lot of headache by pointing out ahead of time why they're impossible seems prudent even if you don't have a better alternative (no comment on whether increasing minimum wage actually can't have its intended effects -- I don't know enough to contribute positively to either side of that debate). If somebody comes along and asks you to build an encryption system that only a million people in the government can break into then you don't need a better solution available to be allowed to tell them it's impossible. Similarly with nonsensical ideas like DRM, perpetual motion, .... Maybe it's worth your time to provide real solutions (picking on the DRM example, if the end user doesn't control the hardware and the content is interactive then the problem is solvable), but it's still beneficial to the other side to prove their idea can't work. Is the assumption of bad faith warranted?