Hacker News Reader

Comment by fzfaa | Hacker News Reader

Dude, calm down. It's just DRM for movies.

everyone has a responsibility to not do anything reprehensible. Some people just do not have a very good value system. I, for example, would not, no matter the money offered, construct a prison for kidnapped kids, or software to scam elderly people of their life savings. I also would not produce shit like DRM. Some clearly will, and hopefully there is a place for them :)

who the fuck equates DRM with kidnapping children?

I dont know, who does? I did not.

The trick is to give you just enough information so that you don't know you're building a prison for kidnapped kids. I don't want to go too much in Godwin territory, but this trick worked well in the past.

I would take a step towards it, picking an example from a company that was literally created by the guys who caused Godwin's law to exist: imagine a bunch of software engineers at Volkswagen, all from different teams, being individually asked to create components for a test system, unit tests, simulations, etc. and none of them knowing that these apparently innocent parts, when seen individually, would be put together and allow Dieselgate!

You probably would, given the circumstances. What if, for example, every kid was kidnapped to begin with, but after a long time of your campaigning to your superiors, they'd give the go-ahead for a less horrible prison for them?

I think the focus of this is wrong. DRM is bad, and what's worse is people being set up for disappointment when they discover this badness. They are entitled to know what they're getting themselves into. I gladly pay for DRM-ed entertainment, with the knowledge that it's an experience that will go away. Like going to the movies or watching a sunset, it's to be expected that these go away, and by knowing this, I can, as living-feeling human being, make an informed decision. What's not okay is lying about buying something, only to discover later that the usage is extensively limited. All these stores telling us that we buy, when in fact we rent, or license. And that they validate their thing by spying, while pretending that you're private and comfortable in your own home. Also not okay.

>Build me a doorknob that shocks people.

Correct answer: No, that is dumb.

>No, really, it's cool, I pinky swear it'll always be paired with a doorknob grounder(TM) I paid some other guy to make.

You: It's just a doorknob for shocking people.

This is why we live in the worst timeline. Deep down, you know this to be true.

The answer is always that someone's just working for hire. Even repressive regimes are made up of 99% of people just doing their jobs to get their paycheck, looking the other way, or down. A great movie is "Cube".

That's just naive. Morality is not as easy as not making a stupid decision. What if you have a comfortable job and now they are asking you to build such a product? What if losing your job would make your life inconvenient? What if it would make it really hard for some time? What if you would miss your mortgage payments and thereby lose your home? Or you couldn't pay for an ongoing medical treatment?

Yes, ignorance is a huge contributor to overall suffering. But you can't just simply eliminate ignorance. (Or a great many other failings of people)

> >Build me a doorknob that shocks people.

> Correct answer: No, that is dumb.

"Build me a fence that shocks people"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com