I’d say that’s a philosophical question.

And worse even, I’d say this is something that changes with the culture of people.

a while ago, gladiators killing & maiming each other for entertainment was considered fine.
Raping and Abducting during wartime was normal.

Currently, I’d say the cultural moral compass has shifted enough, to consider these two examples rather bad behaviour.

But as Tasty seems to have had a nice life and didn’t suffer, so had it better than most cows which end up in a similar fate, I’d say that currently this would not be considered “bad” behaviour by most people.

Of course there is a viewpoint already out, that all killing of animals is equivalent, in other words equivalent to killing humans. From that point of view, what you did is rather horrific.
Maybe, in some time, when something like lab-grown meat without any nervous system is commonplace, killing animals for food becomes as horrific as we consider killing other humans for food.
Or, you know, it could also swing the other way, and an apocalypse makes Soylent from dead people completely normal food.

So is this theory of veganism to not cause pain to an animal? If so what about ethically sourced meat. Like bullet to the head/decapitation. Most of those creatures feel nothing, they just end.

lots (propably most) animals used for farming meat are in pain during their lives.
That’s longer than the time they’re dying in any case.

I would expect that to be true as well.
For some reason I can’t really explain anymore, I was thinking of a situation where the confession is made, and reiterated at every step in the prosecutorial process, without any other evidence (for or against) being available for the process.

I… don’t think that’s true.

I’d expect to get convicted if I make a (reasonable) confession of murdering someone who vanished, even if there is no single other bit of evidence.

it would have been way worse, because it would have been less discoverable in a closed source software by someone somewhere

I mean, what’s a “proper audit”?
most audits my company does are a complete smoke and mirrors sham. But they do get certifications. Is that “proper”?

I’m pretty confident that the code-quality of linux is, on average, higher than that of the windows kernel. And that is because not only do other people read and review, the programmer also knows his shit is for everyone to see. So by and large they are more ashamed to submit some stringy mess that barely works