i think the main purpose of this is to pull in illegal streams of copyright content, so the readme probably has to be intentionally obtuse to avoid summoning law enforcement.
Especially for media playback tools, to say its main purpose is for crime is as silly as to say a monitor’s main purpose is for looking at Facebook.
Similarly, I’d assume most people who use Jellyfin/Plex/etc acquire their content through questionably legal sources. There simply aren’t many legal avenues left to acquire DRM free media. Especially not where you’re rebroadcasting from a webpage. The “arr” suffix on this software is especially flagging - there is a popular suite of software associated with piracy and they all use the “arr” suffix.
Reading source code is nice and all, but come on, that’s not the main purpose of most open source code.
> Broadcastarr is a service that allows you to broadcast media content retrieved from web pages.
That’s the purpose.
The *arr software by contrast are pretty explicit about what they're for. e.g. radarr says it will upgrade a movie you have from dvd to bluray quality via torrent or usenet, which is almost certainly illegal. It does look like they don't distribute executables though, so their repositories contain only a detailed description of the knowledge of how to perform illegal activities.
Same for games, I have titles like RDR which I bought from a bargain bin while it was still very much in vogue for ~2 EUR. I can't use it as a copy but the supermarket bargain bin can be an eternal Black Friday for your media consumption.
Thermonuclear weapons weren’t built to destroy the world, either.
Shooting a gun is, in most places, super illegal. Even if you don't hit anyone, firing your pistol anywhere where there's people is sure to attract attention from law enforcement, unless at a specially designated area like a gun range.
And what the hell are guns made for if not to shoot?? That's literally the only thing they do!
The best proof is that a gun which obviously cannot shoot (is visibly unloaded, disabled, etc.) doesn't act as a deterrent despite still being a gun.
Guns are the reason police don’t get punched in the face or attacked with sticks. They serve this purpose even while remaining holstered.
That deterrent cannot exist without the threat, but the threat can exist without deterrent. A gun or a bomb which cannot kill you will not deter you. The object is worthless, the promise that it can harm or kill you is the only thing that matters. So the only point of the gun and the bomb is to kill. Everything else is a consequence that derives from that.
To answer your points:
Yes, the bombs were built with the single reason to be able to destroy cities and kill millions. Weapon specs don't list and quantify "deterrent" because that's not a characteristic of the weapon. If you build a guaranteed missile shield around you country then that exact "city killer" bomb is no longer a deterrent.
No, the authority is why police doesn't get punched in the face. The authority is backed mainly by law which gives them the right to fine or arrest. Taking away your money or freedom are the the real deterrents (as evidenced by judicial systems relying solely on this in most countries). In most of the world you can punch a police agent in the face and not get shot and people know that so they still do it.
You can lead a horse to water, and all that.
Did GPT-2 write this?
Guns are made for shooting ...
Who or what is shot at is entirely on the end-user of the tool in hand.
Some folks have never once in their entire life ever shot at a person (or even thought to), while having shot many animals to feed themselves or their families. Some folks have never once even shot at a living thing. Some just shoot for "target practice" or for "fun".
If you shoot at people you'd better have a really valid reason or expect consequences to follow.