Comment by andrewflnr 5 days ago I like to add the statement, "Sufficiently advanced negligence is indistinguishable from malice." 2 comments andrewflnr Reply tomxor 5 days ago "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from negligence"FTFY :) andrewflnr 5 days ago Funny, but no. The broader principle is that even if something could conceivably be "negligence", you eventually have to treat it as malice. The possibility of hiding malice in the guise of negligence is only one of the reasons that's true.
tomxor 5 days ago "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from negligence"FTFY :) andrewflnr 5 days ago Funny, but no. The broader principle is that even if something could conceivably be "negligence", you eventually have to treat it as malice. The possibility of hiding malice in the guise of negligence is only one of the reasons that's true.
andrewflnr 5 days ago Funny, but no. The broader principle is that even if something could conceivably be "negligence", you eventually have to treat it as malice. The possibility of hiding malice in the guise of negligence is only one of the reasons that's true.
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from negligence"
FTFY :)
Funny, but no. The broader principle is that even if something could conceivably be "negligence", you eventually have to treat it as malice. The possibility of hiding malice in the guise of negligence is only one of the reasons that's true.