5 ms·

Unfortunately, your analogy is excessively dramatic and misses the reality of the situation. It's easy to create surreal situations in which absolute visions of

• zachlipton 13y ago
  Apologies for trying to make a point. If anything, my analogy seems pretty much on point, as it barely changes the reality around the events here as described: banging on door <=> text/phone call, which likely causes an audible alert stranger <=> contact/acquaintance/vendor/client/boss/relative/lover/ex-lover/dentist of a new user 6am <=> 6am their buddy <=> their contact the trash <=> a new user's cell phone contacts has photos to share <=> has photos to share there never were any photos <=> there never were any photos unbelievable jackass <=> unbelievable jackass Seems close enough. But my real question for you is which is it? Did a developer/Path act unethically, but you believe those actions are justified because people have families they need to care for? Or do you believe that Path/the developers did nothing wrong and I'm just applying my own morals to the situation? One or the other is a legitimate position to take (though I may disagree with your view), but you can't have both.
• pessimizer 13y ago
  Because your hand-waving and appeals to authority are so much more relevant?