Saryn

Wait, is this a metaphore for billionaire CEOs?

It would be interesting to test with other groups of people. For example, when happens if all my review says is "I don't like jews" or "I don't like Americans/Russians/Chinese people".

Jolly, I can feel the americaness oozing from the screen. They say ignorance is bliss but this doesn't seem very blissful to me.

Godspeed my USA friends and strap in - you are about find out so much in the next couple of decades.

Everyone knows that anyone who knows anything about anything would go for the most evolutionary diverse group - spiders.

There is nothing these little guys can't do. Fly over hundreds of kilometres? You got it. Extend their nervous systems several thousand times past their body area using web? Check. Biological hydraulic system? Yup. Jump 10 to 50 times their body lenght? No problem. Live underwater using silk made diving suit? You bet your sweet behind. Paralyze your body after one bite? Easy.

Somehow I seriously doubt that

Didn't blow Bubba so far

No yeah I didn't mean to imply that this is something that is particular to Russia, or any other entity for that matter. I think the functions and methods must be analyzed independently of who they concern on either side of the equation

Indeed, different approaches lead to different conclusions. Which isn't to say either or is exclusively valid. As I always like to say - two things can true at the same time.

Also, I get what you're saying and didn't mean to imply you were making a normative statement. I also didn't mean to imply that the aspect of understanding is not important. It's fundamental, including from a practical standpoint. In fact, in the past I used to be so much into figuring out the why that I ended up underestimating the what . Then I noticed that different whys can lead to the same or very similar whats, regardless of the content of the whys and I thought that was very interesting. And yet, trying to seperate them beyond the conceptual has tunred out to be nigh impossible.

Anyway, confusing internal monologue over.

Edit: Basically, I am sorta halfway retracting the "distinction without a difference" and going with the always safe "it's complicated"

Thing is, that's a distinction without a difference, at least in the eyes of analysts in the IC, the people charged with making a formal assessment. From that perspective, what you do is more important than why you do it because the effects aland the fallout are all the same.

.... so he is an asset?

Stop projecting and it'll be fine

Indeed. I chalk it up to the power of narratives and emotions. These are emotional decisions by managers who don't know what they're doing but salivate at the opportunity to limit someone's access to something for not paying them or for using something differently than how they'd like to after paying. You know, stupid s**t like kernel level anti cheat and denuvo.