6 ms·
Not sure if you're accusing me of having an incorrect understanding of the word "general" or not, but when someone says "X is simply wrong in general", most peo
by cocktailpeanuts 9y ago
Not sure if you're accusing me of having an incorrect understanding of the word "general" or not, but when someone says "X is simply wrong in general", most people understand it as "Generally, X is simply wrong". Even using your claim of:
> When I say a rule is true in general, then that means for me that rule is always true no matter what
and interpreting the exact sentence you posted above:
> The "don't roll your own crypto" is simply wrong in general
I can't see how you can interpret it anything other than:
> The "don't roll your own crypto" is simply wrong no matter what.
If you wanted to say what you're claiming to have said, you should have said "'The don't roll your own crypto' is not always correct".
Since you said you teach math, I'm sure you understand inverse/converse/contrapositive relations.
- madez 9y agoI'm not accusing you of anything. When I wrote > The "don't roll your own crypto" is simply wrong in general then I meant the negation of > The "don't roll your own crypto" is true in general I should have used the much clearer > The "don't roll your own crypto" is not always correct I differentiate between "A is not true" and "not(A) is true". The latter I use when the negation of A is a tautology, the former I use when A may or may not be true. In the case of "A is wrong in general" this led to "A is wrong in general" -> "A is not true in general" -> "not(A is true in general)" -> "not(A is true in all cases)" -> "There are cases where not(A) is true".