Return to Answer

I don't see how technically worded questions about how low level OS processes work is necessarily a bad thing. Running Mac OS X on non mac hardware seems to be equally against Apple's published licensing terms as is jailbreaking an iOS device. The legality of an action gets sorted out when a judge weighs all of the conflicting laws. The law starts to "solidify" when judges publish precedent and intentionally state that some rulings are to be considered broad rather than an isolated finding in some narrow case Moe vs. Larry

Many questions here will fall in gray areas where there is no precedent but simply a bunch conflicting laws and hundreds of years of case history that may or may not apply to a shrink wrapped, non-negotiated, un-signed EULA between parties of radically unequal bargaining power. Add in the worldwide nature of this site and trying to set a bar based on one (or even a plurality of) jurisdiction(s).

Discussing darwin open source OS and how Mac OS X differs isn't guaranteed to be legal in all places or situations, but exercising prior restraint of discussion on how things work seems quite draconian for a site that intends to be a collection of knowledge.

I'm not going to pretend that everyone asking these questions is a university researcher, but would we turn the same away if they wanted to discuss things here that are in fact legal and/or ethical in the eyes of professionals?

The plus side of not blanket banning these is:

1. Assume that people with intelligent, answerable questions will do just that
2. Reinforces the trust given to our human exception handlers to handle bad questions in this area just like they do with all other bad questions.

If our moderators are letting us know

• The vast majority of these questions are worthless
• They can't keep up with proper work due to the load of culling these bad questions

I think it's too soon to tell if a ban discussion is worth having. We don't know yet what good might be thrown out with the bad.

I don't see how technically worded questions about how low level OS processes work is necessarily a bad thing. Running Mac OS X on non mac hardware seems to be equally against Apple's published licensing terms as is jailbreaking an iOS device. The legality of an action gets sorted out when a judge weighs all of the conflicting laws. The law starts to "solidify" when judges publish precedent and intentionally state that some rulings are to be considered broad rather than an isolated finding in some narrow case Moe vs. Larry

Many questions here will fall in gray areas where there is no precedent but simply a bunch conflicting laws and hundreds of years of case history that may or may not apply to a shrink wrapped, non-negotiated, un-signed EULA between parties of radically unequal bargaining power. Add in the worldwide nature of this site and trying to set a bar based on one (or even a plurality of) jurisdiction(s) seems to make it extremely hard to say which if any set of laws should govern our attempts to control information.

Discussing darwin open source OS and how Mac OS X differs isn't guaranteed to be legal in all places or situations, but exercising prior restraint of discussion on how things work seems quite draconian for a site that intends to be a collection of knowledge.

I'm not going to pretend that everyone asking these questions is a university researcher, but would we turn the same away if they wanted to discuss things here that are in fact legal and/or ethical in the eyes of professionals?

The plus side of not blanket banning these is:

1. Assume that people with intelligent, answerable questions will do just that
2. Reinforces the trust given to our human exception handlers to handle bad questions in this area just like they do with all other bad questions.

If our moderators are letting us know

• The vast majority of these questions are worthless
• They can't keep up with proper work due to the load of culling these bad questions

I think it's too soon to tell if a ban discussion is worth having. We don't know yet what good might be thrown out with the bad.

I don't see how technically worded questions about how low level OS processes work is necessarily a bad thing. Running Mac OS X on non mac hardware seems to be equally against Apple's published licensing terms as is jailbreaking an iOS device. The legality of an action gets sorted out when a judge weighs all of the conflicting laws and publishes precedent and many questions will fall in gray areas where there is no precedent but simply a bunch conflicting laws and hundreds of years of case history that may or may not apply to a shrink wrapped, non-negotiated, not signed EULA between parties of radically unequal bargaining power.

Discussing darwin open source OS and how Mac OS X differs isn't guaranteed to be legal in all places or situations, but exercising prior restraint of discussion on how things work seems quite draconian for a site that intends to be a collection of knowledge.

I'm not going to pretend that everyone asking these questions is a university researcher, but would we turn the same away if they wanted to discuss things here that are in fact legal and/or ethical in the eyes of professionals?

The plus side of not blanket banning these is:

1. Assume that people with intelligent, answerable questions will do just that
2. Reinforces the trust given to our human exception handlers to handle bad questions in this area just like they do with all other bad questions.

Only when those moderators have evidence that the time spent on these one questions is to clearly all out of scope and districts from their duties to the site as a whole, then a ban discussion is worth having so we can see what good will be left out by eliminating the bad.

I don't see how technically worded questions about how low level OS processes work is necessarily a bad thing. Running Mac OS X on non mac hardware seems to be equally against Apple's published licensing terms as is jailbreaking an iOS device. The legality of an action gets sorted out when a judge weighs all of the conflicting laws. The law starts to "solidify" when judges publish precedent and intentionally state that some rulings are to be considered broad rather than an isolated finding in some narrow case Moe vs. Larry

Many questions here will fall in gray areas where there is no precedent but simply a bunch conflicting laws and hundreds of years of case history that may or may not apply to a shrink wrapped, non-negotiated, un-signed EULA between parties of radically unequal bargaining power. Add in the worldwide nature of this site and trying to set a bar based on one (or even a plurality of) jurisdiction(s).

Discussing darwin open source OS and how Mac OS X differs isn't guaranteed to be legal in all places or situations, but exercising prior restraint of discussion on how things work seems quite draconian for a site that intends to be a collection of knowledge.

I'm not going to pretend that everyone asking these questions is a university researcher, but would we turn the same away if they wanted to discuss things here that are in fact legal and/or ethical in the eyes of professionals?

The plus side of not blanket banning these is:

1. Assume that people with intelligent, answerable questions will do just that
2. Reinforces the trust given to our human exception handlers to handle bad questions in this area just like they do with all other bad questions.

If our moderators are letting us know

• The vast majority of these questions are worthless
• They can't keep up with proper work due to the load of culling these bad questions

I think it's too soon to tell if a ban discussion is worth having. We don't know yet what good might be thrown out with the bad.

I don't see how technically worded questions about how low level OS processes work is necessarily a bad thing. Running Mac OS X on non mac hardware seems to be equally against Apple's published licensing terms as is jailbreaking an iOS device. The legality of an action gets sorted out when a judge weighs all of the conflicting laws and publishes precedent and many questions will fall in gray areas where there is no precedent but simply a bunch conflicting laws and hundreds of years of case history that may or may not apply to a shrink wrapped, non-negotiated, not signed EULA between parties of radically unequal bargaining power.

Discussing darwin open source OS and how Mac OS X differs isn't guaranteed to be legal in all places or situations, but exercising prior restraint of discussion on how things work seems quite draconian for a site that intends to be a collection of knowledge.

I'm not going to pretend that everyone asking these questions is a university researcher, but would we turn the same away if they wanted to discuss things here that are in fact legal and/or ethical in the eyes of professionals?

I don't see how technically worded questions about how low level OS processes work is necessarily a bad thing. Running Mac OS X on non mac hardware seems to be equally against Apple's published licensing terms as is jailbreaking an iOS device. The legality of an action gets sorted out when a judge weighs all of the conflicting laws and publishes precedent and many questions will fall in gray areas where there is no precedent but simply a bunch conflicting laws and hundreds of years of case history that may or may not apply to a shrink wrapped, non-negotiated, not signed EULA between parties of radically unequal bargaining power.

Discussing darwin open source OS and how Mac OS X differs isn't guaranteed to be legal in all places or situations, but exercising prior restraint of discussion on how things work seems quite draconian for a site that intends to be a collection of knowledge.

I'm not going to pretend that everyone asking these questions is a university researcher, but would we turn the same away if they wanted to discuss things here that are in fact legal and/or ethical in the eyes of professionals?

The plus side of not blanket banning these is:

1. Assume that people with intelligent, answerable questions will do just that
2. Reinforces the trust given to our human exception handlers to handle bad questions in this area just like they do with all other bad questions.

Only when those moderators have evidence that the time spent on these one questions is to clearly all out of scope and districts from their duties to the site as a whole, then a ban discussion is worth having so we can see what good will be left out by eliminating the bad.