3 ms·

IANAL but "18 U.S.C. 1038 - False information and hoaxes": Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumsta

IANAL but "18 U.S.C. 1038 - False information and hoaxes": Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed... if death results, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any number of years up to life, or both https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/html/USCODE-2009-title18-partI-chap47-sec1038.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2009-title18/html...

JoeAltmaier 6y ago
Well, that one word "reasonably" covers it all. You paint a fairy-tale picture, and all reasonableness is right out the window. Oh! Oh! You deliberately left out (those …'s) the part about it being information about a crime! What a troll that was.
- ethbro 6y ago
  For reference, ... may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute a violation of chapter 2 [aircraft & motor vehicles], 10 [biological weapons], 11B [chemical weapons], 39 [explosives & other dangerous articles], 40 [importation, manufacture, distribution & storage of explosive materials], 44 [firearms], 111 [shipping], or 113B [terrorism] of this title, section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284) [sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel], or section 46502, the second sentence of section 46504, section 46505(b)(3) or (c), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved, or section 60123(b) of title 49, shall... IANAL, but these don't seem to be the "lying about treasure" types of statutes. Unless your treasure is plutonium.
- shkkmo 6y ago
  You could have conveyed this information with casting aspersions about intent or using such a snarky tone. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
    Sorry. I could have been nicer. But it seemed to me, to be a deliberate misrepresentation and I called it out.
    - shkkmo 6y ago
      Perhaps it was deliberate misrepresentation, that isn't the point. The point is that calling people out for deliberate misrepresentation tends to lead discussions away from the constructive, informative and civil ideal that HN aspires to.
- mannykannot 6y ago
  Ha! There's something particularly ironic in gp eliding material facts from a post about 'false information and hoaxes!'

JoeAltmaier 6y ago

Well, that one word "reasonably" covers it all. You paint a fairy-tale picture, and all reasonableness is right out the window. Oh! Oh! You deliberately left out (those …'s) the part about it being information about a crime! What a troll that was.

ethbro 6y ago
For reference, ... may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute a violation of chapter 2 [aircraft & motor vehicles], 10 [biological weapons], 11B [chemical weapons], 39 [explosives & other dangerous articles], 40 [importation, manufacture, distribution & storage of explosive materials], 44 [firearms], 111 [shipping], or 113B [terrorism] of this title, section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284) [sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel], or section 46502, the second sentence of section 46504, section 46505(b)(3) or (c), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved, or section 60123(b) of title 49, shall... IANAL, but these don't seem to be the "lying about treasure" types of statutes. Unless your treasure is plutonium.
shkkmo 6y ago
You could have conveyed this information with casting aspersions about intent or using such a snarky tone. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  Sorry. I could have been nicer. But it seemed to me, to be a deliberate misrepresentation and I called it out.
  - shkkmo 6y ago
    Perhaps it was deliberate misrepresentation, that isn't the point. The point is that calling people out for deliberate misrepresentation tends to lead discussions away from the constructive, informative and civil ideal that HN aspires to.
mannykannot 6y ago
Ha! There's something particularly ironic in gp eliding material facts from a post about 'false information and hoaxes!'