Comment by andrewflnr 1 year ago I like to add the statement, "Sufficiently advanced negligence is indistinguishable from malice." 2 comments andrewflnr Reply tomxor 1 year ago "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from negligence"FTFY :) andrewflnr 1 year 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 1 year ago "Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from negligence"FTFY :) andrewflnr 1 year 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 1 year 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.