With the dose of bad faith you put on those arguments, it sounds like you would fit right in with the described Meta lawyers. I'm not sure it's even worth engaging with you considering how you engaged with the content by ignoring the preface about John Adams and the ethics of practicing law.
Every now and then I get the suspicion hacker news is used to practice sophistry for the workplace without the risk of making yourself look like a jackass at work.
Of course it would break the rules about civility here to directly accuse someone of that. Which makes me want to joke that it's an intentional feature of the site and explains why a VC firm wants to run a tech watering hole.
Sometimes I think people are so into libertarian views as almost to be a religion that they see anything a government would do an ethically evil act, so it appears they have no morals/ethics of their own when they share those thoughts.
I don't think it was a useful example since what is happening with Meta is different. It's not like a British soldier admitted to Adams that he murdered someone and Adams shared that fact in court.
