Here's the typical life cycle of a piece of software:
Release 1.0: fits into a small footprint on the hard drive. Has a specific set of features.
Release 2.0: Added features. Takes more HD space, more Ram, but not enough to upgrade your machine.
Release 3.0: Getting kind of pokey, but hey, you now have Yet Another Email program embedded in your word processor or whatever.
Release 4.0: You have to upgrade your computer to use it. You upgrade, get more ram and more HD, creating WASTE that goes into the landfills. Costs you money to upgrade. The harm: your wallet, the landfills, and a continuing escalation of the throwaway technology society.
Anyway, situations which do not "cause harm" but are bad (causing harm is a relative term, incidentally-- harm to whom? or what? How much is considered "harm"?):
I unfairly get a D- on a paper or test. At this stage in my life, a low score on a test or paper won't make or break me, but I'm still pissed at the unfairness of the grade and unhappy about the grade itself. Has harm actually been done to anything other than my ego? No. Is it still a bad situation? Yes, because there's no saying the grade-giver isn't being unfair to other students with more to lose.
An SUV cuts me off in traffic so I have to slam on my brakes and cuts my forward visibility down to 0. This is a bad situation in that it is unsafe-- there is a potential for harm. However, there is no *actual* harm done until my roof scrapes his oilpan. |
