Obviously we need to find a middle ground between owning the things we purchase, and not owning them. Having access, but making it annoying is a very reasonable option.
Why? We are paying full price for these devices and nothing in any agreement made at the time of purchase suggests that you don’t own them. Why is it necessary to meet a middle ground between “you got what you paid for” and “you didn’t”?
What is it a compromise between? People who think they own the thing they paid for and people who don’t?
Obviously we need to find a middle ground between owning the things we purchase, and not owning them. Having access, but making it annoying is a very reasonable option.
Why? We are paying full price for these devices and nothing in any agreement made at the time of purchase suggests that you don’t own them. Why is it necessary to meet a middle ground between “you got what you paid for” and “you didn’t”?
that was a very obvious joke
Poe’s law. You should have used tone indicators…
After reading through the rest of this comment section, I’m not so sure about that
Because everything must get worse.
I realize you are making a joke, and I agree that purchase is always better than subscription. Everyone in this situation owns their device.
But that doesn’t mean an easy to activate security bypass should be made available to everyone with no guardrails, either, should it?