Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yes, because the counter point to that reduces to "criminals do crime" and that is never a good argument against the personal rights of the smallest, lest powerful, most vulnerable, and most disenfranchised unit in the legal system, the private person.



The private person is vulnerable because he maybe can't use an emulator and need to buy a Switch instead?


no one ever said that, stop derailing arguments. this is bs.


So why specifically is the private person vulnerable in this case?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: