People love to talk about what the intentions are. However, when a system constantly produces a different outcome than the one it is "intended" for then it's perfectly reasonable to assume the actual intention is the outcome it continues to produce.
@yogthos Someday I'm going to have to write something about how terrifying the POSIWID principle is. People are already bad enough at distinguishing between intent and effect (in both directions!) — explicitly legitimizing this idea will be disasterous if it catches on more broadly. But I'm not nearly at a point where I can fully put my thoughts into words.
@yogthos (Though to be fair, a large part of my objection is a direct result of a lifetime of not being neurotypical, and thus having my intent frequently and inconsistently misread because I don't respond to situations in the way neurotypicals do.)
@kechpaja @yogthos Yeah, I think the problem here is conflating "purpose" and "intent," but I also think Yogthos' point (correct if wrong) is that once the outcome of a system is learned, the perpetuation of said system must be read as intentionally producing said result.
@tbmcqueen @kechpaja yup, that is what I was trying to convey there