|
|
|
|
|
|
by 794CD01
3430 days ago
|
|
|
The assertion is based on the idea that this thing you did is a reflection on who you are, so people who interact with you have a right to know about it so they can judge you by it. I agree that in this specific instance, it was the job of Oculus' legal team to discredit the report in front of the court. Publishing it after the fact for review by the public doesn't make sense, and calling for it is petty. |
|
|
Carmack isn't calling for it to be published. He only said he thinks the system should work that way.