zlacker

> It's a very harmful practice to intentionally try to hurt companies, when you can just block what you don't like.

I say tit for tat. They're intentionally trying to harm me, spying on me, maybe infecting my computer, mining crypto with my CPU, or wasting my network bandwidth. They could just not do that and there wouldn't be any concern about reciprocity

>>malfis+(OP)
> I say tit for tat.

Does your say have any relevance here in terms of what the law is? Are you a state judge tasked with interpreting the law? Where's the tit-for-tat clause?