[kordlessagain]

Since when is intent to implement a feature "cheeky"?

> but shocked to find out there’s a ton of projects openly built around breaking the law

The original statement oversimplifies a complex legal and ethical landscape in technology. It fails to account for the gradual nature of discovering various projects with potential legal implications, instead projecting an unrealistic sudden shock. This overlooks the nuanced reality of how technology often operates in legal gray areas, especially when dealing with emerging fields or novel applications of existing tech.

The assertion of widespread illegality ignores crucial legal concepts like fair use, which provides lawful ways to utilize publicly available information under certain circumstances. For instance, web crawling for legitimate purposes, including research or analysis that falls under fair use, can be perfectly legal despite potential objections from website owners.

Furthermore, the statement disregards the principle that information openly published on the internet, without robust privacy protections, may often be legally utilized in ways the publisher didn't anticipate. This reflects a misunderstanding of how modern information ecosystems function and the legal frameworks governing them. By presenting a black-and-white view of legality in tech projects, the original statement hinders a more sophisticated understanding of the intricate balance between innovation, law, and ethical considerations in the digital age. It's crucial to approach these issues with a nuanced perspective that acknowledges the complexities of applying traditional legal concepts to rapidly evolving technologies and practices.