[cjslep]

Because you have not cared to clarify your ethical view in the last 3 responses to me, nor in your ethics statement of your project.

Your system is designed to download and save information in an unaccountable manner on behalf of anyone, "unaccountable" literally is a doorway to "for any further purposes", so it's a very safe assumption.

The lack of clarity also comes from ignoring the bulk of my previous message. Ball is still in your court. I am inviting you to make this exact clarification (plus far more), when all you seem interested in doing is dodging, delaying. The worst action you could possibly take is accusing me for assuming in order to fill in the very deliberate blanks you are leaving behind.

[sneak]

> Your system is designed to download and save information in an unaccountable manner on behalf of anyone

I think perhaps you have confused some source code that I have released with a service that performs a function on behalf of a user. I operate no such service.

All I have done is produced a tool that allows a user who downloads and builds and runs that tool to download data from a website, much like a browser or any other HTTP client. There is no "on behalf of"—it's just a tool for a first party to use.

[cjslep]

And we've come full circle: your argument here is exactly the same as here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22528636

I am happy to let you keep showing off your circular reasoning to the world, and will happily repeat myself pointing out all my counterpoints you did not engage with and ignored.

For example:

- I claimed a technology's existence is enough to cause real world consequences. You ignored this point.

- I mentioned you are not including safeties to building a tool to protect its user[0] (the "first party" user of your tool) and its targets ("second party" people the tool-users are subjecting to your tool). That makes it legally/morally unappealing to use as a tool(puts self in danger), and morally unappealing to be subjected to. Why build a tool this way to be completely legally/morally unappealing, unless you want to cater to users specifically that do not have such legal/ethical concerns? You ignored this point.

- I have invited you to clarify your ethical view. You are circling back to a previous non-argument.

- You simply refuse to verbalize your implicit moral stance -- that your role as a "toolmaker" absolves you of all the moral consequences of its use[1]. If this is incorrect, I welcome clarification from you.

[0] The laundry list of features of other scrapers I mentioned, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22533439

[1] This moral position has long been well-criticized and is not a sufficiently nuanced moral stance in this day and age. For an old example, consider Tom Lehrer's criticism of von Braun: "'Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department', says Wernher von Braun." [2].

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjDEsGZLbio