morally

Are you saying putting a child at risk of life threatening disease to save the mosquitos is acting morally responsible?

So at least morally, there are sufficiently developers for both emacs and vim (in my experience).

You want to help engineers get out of work they find reprehensible or morally dubious?

I'm not saying it's always morally wrong, but I sometimes find it amusing to see VCs, accelerators etc.

My thoughts were that this reaction is totally predictable, no matter how morally absurd.

If you want more info about the fake left, go read Zizek's piece on the morally corrupt fake left championing of Islamist criminal apologism.

It may be morally absurd, but it's certainly not economically absurd.

But unlike Al Capone, who was considered a gangster and a crook even by the people who loved him, the sharing economy is seen as morally good.

I can't think of anyone I have met who has argued that an abortion 24 hours before the birth would occur naturally is morally acceptable.

I wish people would realize this is a morally neutral outcome.

Yet this just leads to morally bad outcomes that belie the very causes the fake lefties pretend to support, a contradiction that cuts to the core of the fake left paradox.

Are you saying that it's hopeless to expect businesses not to be jerks, or that it's morally acceptable to be a jerk as long as the shareholders see a return on it?

> "building tools and techniques in the active goal of harming human lives has become morally unacceptable.

Also I would dispute that people(edit: this is basically impossible to prove, it'd be nice to see some data) see the sharing economy as "morally good".

I would rather deal with the issue in a way that is morally responsible, than just "do whatever it takes to prevent any harm from coming to my child."

So all of that "freedom" is about being able to use an expensive commercial product that was developed with RnD money from the DOD...but somehow it's morally wrong to not ship source code to a compiler?