206 karma · joined January 29, 2021
False
I shouldn’t have to abide by some stupid rules to plug my server onto the Internet and listen on port 80.
I’m not even saying responsible— just they cant reasonably complain when they drive somewhere new and they don’t like the road conditions.
Your original analogy is more like this: If a person's computer got hacked unintentionally, they shouldn’t be responsible for the damage it caused to others.
However if it does sustain, the $15,000,000,000,000 in debt maturing in less than 5 years will be very hard to refinance at the same interest rates.
No they are not making that assumption.
False analogy.
Ironic that people use this line of reasoning to defend ad blockers (I'm responsible for whatever software I run) but then use the opposite argument when they don't like what the software does.
It is opt-in. You decided to use a browser that implements the full HTML spec. Just use a basic browser.
You failed to make a meaningful counterpoint; the legal/ethical distinction was made clear in the parent post.
That's because the author themselves said in this case, that the reason to submit the malware was to give a "fuck you" to the big corps.