The disdain for spreadsheets comes from people who don’t understand data organization, or people who do.

Tabular data? Good.
Schemaless? Unstructured? Probably maintained by eleventy-four random sales people and an account? Being given to me like it’s a gift and expecting me to just magic it into some reporting system? On a recurring basis? No. Please God no.

I can be trusted to use a spreadsheet for my things that I don’t share. Other people need to use something that will yell at them when they give it malformed gibberish.

Oh, and executable logic doesn’t belong in the same context as data. That shit needs to be able to be told apart from the data.

Did you forget we were talking about 3d printers?

You compared the people making fun of the drm mandate to people making fun of car registration because you can build a kit car, implying that building a 3d printer was a nearly insurmountable hurdle.

Being able to trivially bypass the drm is exactly why it’s laughable.

Cars, bikes, or your dislike have nothing to do with the DRM mandate being toothless and stupid.

Okay? What does that have to do with the drm mandate being easy to get around?
Is your point that it’s okay to put unenforceable, easily bypassed restrictions on stuff if you think they’re bad?

I’m not sure honestly sure what your point is, because you went a bit too far with the analogy.

Itty bitty ones, sure. And they take weeks to produce a working vehicle, of substandard quality.

This was about regulating 3d printers, not guns. A diy printer, a new drm printer and an old not-drm printer produce the same quality output.

A diy 3d printer is just as durable as a purchased one.

If your goal is to have an unregistered car, or in this case a drm free printer, the law seems silly when you can get one for cheaper than the “proper” one and have it out together in an afternoon if you have highschool level mechanical aptitude.

Making a full on machine gun is literally one of the original cottage industries. They’re hard to design but the actual fabrication can be so dumbed down that you can make it out of non un-common household tools with minimal skill.

Some of the tricky bits are making the weapon fire slower, so it doesn’t jam or get so hot rounds fire before they’re actually in the chamber. Or just keeps firing because releasing the trigger wasn’t enough to keep the recoil from keeping it going.
If your goal is to give everyone in the UK too young, old or woman to draft a machine gun to make the Germans regret invading, then a horde of cockney 8 year olds with uncontrolled machine guns and poor trigger discipline is certainly a choice.

It more like mocking car registration because every neighborhood has a few people who can build you a car from scratch in a day, the city already has several thousand car factories that don’t require registration, there’s no mechanism to enforce registration, and the cost of building a new car is a few hundred dollars. The motivation for requiring registration is also to stop people from driving full speed into fast food restaurants is custom built murder buggys. Yeah, you don’t want people to do that but it’s not like it really happens all that often.

Building a 3d printer from a kit is different from building one from scratch. It’s basically screwing parts together and plugging colored wires into matching slots.

My dad had a prosthetic leg, and he bristled at some of the polite or accepting ways that people would talk about disability in a way that stuck with me because he explained it. Basically a dislike of “handicapable” or the notion that you “make up for it” in other ways. To paraphrase: “getting my foot cut off in a car accident didn’t come with some perk that balanced things out”.

I think a lot of the pushback you got came not from a place of rejecting that they could have a bias, but from the topic being broached as a confrontation of bias instead of an explanation of ignorance.
People, like the poster above, who are being conscientious according to their understanding will get indignant or frustrated when that’s met with an unmatched response.

Assuming positive intent colors implicit “positive abelism”, or other “positive -isms” that I’m personally less knowledgeable about, as unfamiliarity or ignorance rather than callousness or rudeness.
In those cases, the person is very unlikely to disagree or pushback if informed about their blind spot. The key part in their head was “disabled people are just as important”, sitting right next to “good people chip in and contribute”. So they respond to “disabled people can’t always contribute” with “disabled people are important!” phrased as "disabled people can contribute!”.

Addressing it as a bias against disabled people doesn’t fit because that part is correct. Need to address it at where the problem is: a misconception about the relationship between human worth, labor and utility.

You are correct that I was not describing capitalism.
I was participating in the silly by creeping closer to full communism and still saying it’s something else.

And I’m not sure why Benny would only get half and 2/3s respectively. They owned the truck, so they’re the one that did the moving. The others are just employees.

Honestly it’s both. Plenty of people with disabilities have plenty to offer. A lot actually don’t though, and they still deserve that helping hand.
A family aquatintance has some mental and physical disabilities. They’re just not going to be able to help in any way that isn’t superficial. And that’s okay. Their worth isn’t defined by their utility.

Attaching how worthwhile it is to help someone to their ability to provide a service inherently says the person who can’t isn’t worthy of help.

We should be good to people because it’s the right thing to do, not out of the expectation of a future repayment. More pragmatically, we should help based on the assumption that the other person would, and that if everyone acted like that the world would be better.

I think the other person read a bit much into it, but their base point isn’t wrong.

But see, it’s not fair if people just get what they need! You need to make sure people are paying for it!

We can make it part of the system that each person gets help according to their needs, but each person also gives help according to their abilities. Yes yes. This is now definitely capitalism because it’s transactions.