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