according to some theory, the law is always broken in some ways, but the practice of a lawful society is to converge towards not-broken, over and over again. Is theory consistent with practice? well, ask yourself which governance, which language group, which implementors of law.. since they are composed of humans.
While we are at it with a thought exercise.. how are large tech companies with new sci-fi tech breaking laws at will for profit, so different than horse-lords or Roman legions taking what they will and "fixing the mess later" .. ?
Well, when certain users have behplden themselves and their creature comforts to the corporate teat, that is expected to happen. Somehow, I doubt most Youtubers actually have the chops to set up their own hosting/streaming operation, plus maintain relationships with advertisers who pay their bills.
Does it not make sense then, that when such people have their livelihood threatened by the Ur-Intetnet ethos, that they turn against it?
I don't condone or support it, but I can understand how the shift has happened.
according to some theory, the law is always broken in some ways, but the practice of a lawful society is to converge towards not-broken, over and over again. Is theory consistent with practice? well, ask yourself which governance, which language group, which implementors of law.. since they are composed of humans.
While we are at it with a thought exercise.. how are large tech companies with new sci-fi tech breaking laws at will for profit, so different than horse-lords or Roman legions taking what they will and "fixing the mess later" .. ?