Purposeful Design Defects

Perhaps you have been unfortunate enough to notice that some products you have purchased are designed purposely to have defects that reduce their efficiency and convenience.

I find this type of thing infuriatingly offensive and threatening to the security of the nation I belong to. Such developers who would ever design a product with purposeful defect have only destructive and hostile intentions against those who would buy them, and they should not be allowed to sell such products in a lawful economy.

They likely tell themselves in the current age: well it doesn’t harm their body so there is nothing wrong with causing these design features to be inadequate or faulty for the purpose they are intended.

However, if you are a consumer and buy a product, it is not difficult to notice such defects as purposeful, because they stand out like obscenely grotesque displays of death and carnage amid a family friendly display of cute and cuddly creatures. That is how obvious such things are to a consumer such as myself, and I suspect that many other people notice that too because of how obvious those things are. You don’t need product design or engineering knowledge to understand that the inconvenience of some features is purposeful when the surrounding elements are normally convenient.

This should be illegal, and I would be surprised to learn that it is not already illegal, but I haven’t looked up the laws on my own as of yet.

The offense of a purposeful design defect does in fact cause harm to the mental health of the consumer, and that is a very real safety concern that is relevant to the entire community. Aggravating the mental health of any person on purpose, no matter how stable you think they are or how insignificant your bullying is, may result in catastrophic consequences of domestic violence and terrorism.

If the source of the bullying is from the government, domestic terrorism may be the natural solution to fight back against it, because the perpetrators are unwilling to confront their target in person. There is no other alternative except to target the citizens who are supporting the perpetrators in the government despite them likely being unaware of what is happening. Thus, it is justice to attack the citizens if the government they are supporting is inciting terrorism with hostile antagonism in secret and unwilling to present themselves as responsible for what they are doing. The citizens make that possible with the trust they are irresponsibly giving the government, and destroying them will be productive toward the solution of stopping the perpetrators from further bullying, otherwise known as torture with the means of a national military as their tools of causing that suffering.

So you see— a purposeful design flaw is a very dangerous threat to everyone’s safety in addition to government antagonism of Gentiles, and needs to be outlawed and eliminated with effective investigation.

This was obvious to me when I was interacting with the A.I. system on Apple iPhone for my amusement earlier today. Siri is embarrassingly inept, incompetent, and inefficient. To think that the people in the government want to call their A.I. intelligent at all, is an insult to everyone’s intelligence! Those programs are not intelligent. They are nothing more than go-fetch programs, but cannot resolve problems of communication, cannot infer solutions, cannot speak about their limitations, cannot identify who they report data to, cannot have any interesting conversations because they are incapable of arriving at ideas on their own. I realized she was designed to be inefficient and defective, and that should be a crime.

This is seen in all sorts of software products in the current age. People are designing defects in software to attempt to extort money from consumers because of the problems they invent while hiding their intentions from people.

Here is the fact of the matter: Every sale is a legally binding contract. The contract, and all business owners should already be aware of this, is that the product or service they are offering is what they say they are offering, and the consumer is agreeing to buy that at the offered price.

If the consumer buys what is being offered and later finds out that features of it have been tampered with by the company to make their lives more difficult, antagonize them for being Gentiles, or otherwise inconvenience them while other people, likely the priviliged rich, get to enjoy the product without design defects— that is a breach of contract. That is a crime. They sold something that was not what they said it was.

If an inventor, designer, product salesman is aware of defects in their product, they are legally obligated to disclose what those defects are. So if they design defects on purpose in software to make it more difficult and attempt to create additional microtransactions, that is dishonest, unethical, and illegal because they are not disclosing the defects they are aware of.

PlayStation does this to me often with video game software they manipulate in an attempt to inconvenience me, make video games less fun, and assault my mental health with acts of psychological terrorism. I do not intend to let them get away with those dishonest and unethical crimes of theft— my money for a product of less market value than was agreed and with the intention of cheating me dishonestly as the degenerate criminals they have become. Still though, I will not be able to bring legal charges against them until the USA legal system is no longer hostilely being manipulated against me. Those law systems should be willing to look for problems, investigate situations, and be skilled at identifying what is happening for the benefit of the citizens, but they do no such thing. They are entirely employed now by the criminal organizations that do not want their crimes exposed and they spend most of their time ignoring crimes, covering up evidence, and incriminating people who are innocent.

When the video game software suddenly changes the parameters of the software codes to negatively impact the gameplay experience of an individual who did not consent to such alterations, they are vandalizing their own product, violating my rights as a consumer, and causing me distress. That needs justice.