If I give away food I have a duty not to poison you. It doesn’t matter you didn’t pay for it.

Others are eating it and are fine, chances are you’re allergic. Fortunately all ingredients are listed, you can check - or even modify the recipe yourself.

▲

Chris2048 an hour ago | parent [-]

> Fortunately all ingredients are listed

How does this translate to the vim situation?

	▲	retsibsi 39 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The point would be that it's open source. And "chances are you're allergic" translates to "your use case / expectations are unusual". But in my opinion the analogy doesn't hold well at all, because destroying a persistent undo file without warning is pretty obviously incorrect and unexpected behavior.

▲

ToucanLoucan 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not poison, it's a broken feature. And you have the source code. Fix it if you like.

	▲	pdonis 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, and then have it break again the next time upstream pushes a change. Or have something else break because upstream doesn't care about breaking things that I'm relying on. The only way to "fix" this from a source code perspective would be to fork Neovim.

▲

Grombobulous 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Software isn’t food.

▲

pdonis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

So software that deletes important data of yours without any warning is ok because at least it isn't poisoning you?

▲

2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

brookst 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you have to twist things so far that intent doesn’t matter, something’s wrong.

▲

jeremyjh 2 hours ago | parent [-]

According to TFA, it was completely intentional that they deleted someone’s data that had been created with a different program. Otherwise they would have acknowledged it was a bug. I do not know if this is true, only that it is what TFA claims.

	▲	Grombobulous an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It’s not great that Neovim destroyed/replaced files that aren’t clearly under its purview. They should have probably also made the consideration that a lot of Neovim users are going to be migrating from Vim. Maybe if they’re making their own persistent undo standard, use different file naming conventions. That said, as a fork of Vim, maybe the Neovim authors are at least partially reasonable in assuming that you’re not running multiple forks of Vim that could then potentially conflict with each other. It just sucks that they never really thought of a migration path for this particular feature.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

bigstrat2003 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, everyone is aware of that. The parent poster was bringing up the example of food to demonstrate that our society does not agree that giving something away for free doesn't mean you have no obligation as to potential adverse effects of the thing.

▲

Grombobulous 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Analogies like this don’t work when comparing against heavily regulated industry.

Neovim being free software is a lot different than United Airlines giving me a free flight or my doctor giving me a free consultation.

It’s very true that you can go to civil court and make a claim that a business or individual harmed you. If you do that with Neovim the judge is going to pretty quickly read bullet point #7 of the Apache 2.0 license, you’re going to struggle to prove any kind of mal-intent, you’re going to tell the judge that you paid $0 for the software, and you’ll be pretty quickly sent along your way with no damages awarded.

▲

TheOtherHobbes 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Only in the sense there's no explicit legal responsibility.

Do you really believe developers have exactly zero moral responsibility to their users? None at all?

Really?

Would you still believe that if you found the developers of ssh deliberately included a backdoor for hackers, or neovim was uploading everyone's code to the NSA?

	▲	Grombobulous an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I never said developers have no responsibility. Let’s not escalate. Now we are talking about actively malicious software versus a bug or design flaw. This issue with Neovim sounds like less than ideal design, or a bug, or both, not some kind of intentional affront to users.

▲

Ekaros an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

That is why software should have very large liability for anything software they release do? Say your software due to bug destroys some document. Surely you should pay damages caused by such bug even if quite high?

▲

bsoqk 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You must feel clever completely missing the point on purpose like that.

▲

InsideOutSanta 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"Your analogy is false because the two things you are comparing are not literally the same, dear sir!" is such a classic Internet discussion trope that it must have a name. If it doesn't, can I please name it? Maybe Perfect Analogy Fallacy?

▲

Grombobulous 2 hours ago | parent [-]

But they couldn’t be further from different. You have to have a health inspector visit your kitchen just to sell food at all. You need affirmative permission from the government to sell food.

	▲	InsideOutSanta an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The original analogy was not about selling food: > If I give away food I have a duty not to poison you. It doesn’t matter you didn’t pay for it. If I invite you to eat at my house, there is no health inspector and no government. I'm just giving you free food. Would you agree that I have a duty not to poison you in that case?

▲

Citizen_Lame 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This guy you are arguing with is classic troll, he does it on every topic. Just ignore and don't reply.

	▲	jeltz an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yeah, people like him is what the doenvote button is intended for.
	▲	2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

Grombobulous 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Food is one of the more heavily regulated industries out there. Most other general business types are less regulated than food.