> In fact I even DID respond to your moronic RPG/nuke hyperbole
You need to calm down.
Carmack posits you should be an "absolutist." Always and anything open source, 100%. I pointed out an obvious contradiction, with parallels to the same ridiculous argument "2A" advocates put forth. There are clear red lines that almost the entire population agrees shouldn't be crossed. They fly in the face of "absolutist" and maximalist hyperbole about having things to 100%. Any weapon for anyone. Open source can be used for the same extremely dangerous weapons that almost everyone agrees isn't something a society wants proliferated.
The Bailey is open source absolutism, and when challenged with a case that shows this absolutism maybe isn't so great, the Motte is "all i'm saying is open source is good ok, why are you mentioning dangerous weapons"
Saying "absolutist" is a (btw, completely transparent if you didn't already realize) way to try to make a position sound unreasonable, but I say it all depends on the position. "Why do you have to be so absolutist about keeping slaves, sheesh we already freed like 80% of them we only wanna keep like one maid and one yard hand, let's dial back the emotional hysteria..."
A statement like this tweet is obviously a sound bite and a conversation sparker. And yet, go ahead and say how it's not reasonable. Go ahead and unpack how it's not actually literally possible or would be worse for everyone in the long run.
I at least am not even trying to suggest this Stallman level of purity for real, but, I also defy anyone to prove that it's actually an invalid idea that is the tiniest bit bad for humanity or even business. The way I see it, I forgive 99% of people for being too weak to figure out and stick to what's right, and I forgive that at least 50% because I have to count myself in that group, so, it's really only self-serving graciousness, yet more human weakness (as is calling it human weakness rather than my weakness), but at least I acknowledge that it's a failing, not a virtue. Stallman, and anyone else suggesting this absolutist ideal in this area, are actually right. We're all just too shitty and basic to eat broccoli once in a while and must have burgers and coke, Every. Single. Time. because fuck the tiniest bit of inconvenience today for 100x better tomorrow.
> In fact I even DID respond to your moronic RPG/nuke hyperbole
You need to calm down.
Carmack posits you should be an "absolutist." Always and anything open source, 100%. I pointed out an obvious contradiction, with parallels to the same ridiculous argument "2A" advocates put forth. There are clear red lines that almost the entire population agrees shouldn't be crossed. They fly in the face of "absolutist" and maximalist hyperbole about having things to 100%. Any weapon for anyone. Open source can be used for the same extremely dangerous weapons that almost everyone agrees isn't something a society wants proliferated.
The Bailey is open source absolutism, and when challenged with a case that shows this absolutism maybe isn't so great, the Motte is "all i'm saying is open source is good ok, why are you mentioning dangerous weapons"