Yes. It's because the PNW already had the market on Subaru ownership.
Bitcoin offers an alternatives to funding and incentivizing research and development.
However, there is little interest shown by BTC maxis in moving this direction.
"Morality" (from whatever direction it is studied/theorized from)
Is behavior that promotes/provides cohesion for a group.
Different groups/cultures arrive at differing concepts and systems.
This is why pure ideologies that redefine morality in the context of a larger group tend to have a hard time.
Sadly, our true nature (for humanity as a whole, not small number of outliers) appears to be repeat bouts of willing servitude.
I don't disagree.
All attempts at open sourcing anything (by aftermarket, small scale operations) is generally met with immediate rejection by well lobbied state authority.
That's unfortunate.
Most people become desensitized over time to consistent amounts of capsaicin.
Always had been.
Most consumer devices aren't meant to be secure. Just convenient.
It has gotten increasing attention from the hacking community.
Example-Defcon has had a "car hacking" village and featured talks in the matter for some time.
I see a failure to network between groups and a general dismissive attitude from most of the (auto) service industry and general public overall.
We seem to be a species that gravitates toward hierarchies.
We always have.
I don't disagree with that at all.
However, a structure of control/power will emerge.
So your answer to my last question is "yes".
Define morality.
Or, if you prefer, immoral.
I don't disagree with any of your statements.
But let's go back to where it started.
"Voting is immoral".
Like it or not, there will always be leaders in one form or another.
Voting is one method for the group to decide that (allegedly).
A group that has voluntarily decided to use that method is not acting immorally. (In that moment)
Does it end well? Generally not.
Does it lead to humans gaming the system and appointing psychopaths?
Are you making the argument that because voting is immoral because it can (predictably) lead to the state entities we see today?
It's not immoral if the group voting has chosen to elect leadership in that manner.
