You've missed the entire point which is ironic given your remark about objectivism.

The only way to objectively determine someone's intent is based upon their actions, which is a crude method at best.

If they do something overt and incontrovertably malicious, then you have good cause to judge their intentions as bad.

But lack of overt and incontrovertably malicious acts does not mean their intentions were good. In such a case all you have is their word.

So basically, unless you can prove they were doing something bad, you only have their word to judge what their intentions were.

Do you really think it is wise to base the legality of an action on the word of the person who would suffer if deemed illegal?

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/481/35190#35190