This comment fails to address the point of the comment it is replying to... you simply repeated the original point, but the person you responded to worked within that analogy and then modified it to try to address the statements by Ethereum.
Right, I am saying the analogy I responded to is flawed. Ethereum doesn't invite people to violate the intended use of the contract. It's like claiming that if a corporation got hacked due to lax security, then those hacking are in the clear because that corporation invited them in
