13 ms·
I mean, he very likely killed his neighbor in 2012... so I feel like "colorful" undermines how much of a monster he's been for over a decade.
by gkoberger 5y ago
I mean, he very likely killed his neighbor in 2012... so I feel like "colorful" undermines how much of a monster he's been for over a decade.
- txsoftwaredev 5y agoAnd if the ladies stories about his hammock usage is true...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- joering2 5y ago[I stand corrected]
- ceejayoz 5y agoIt hasn't been "John's software" since 1994.
- kingsuper20 5y agolol. I had to look that up. Maybe he hung out with Chuck Berry too much.
- boomboomsubban 5y agoSo people don't have to look that up, some women claimed he liked seemingly consensual scat. Not really comparable to alleged murder.
- prvc 5y agoThat makes him a monster?
- bennyp101 5y agoI mean, is that 100% true?
- anigbrowl 5y agoProbably (by which I refer to the standard of judgement in the civil suit). https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/20/mcafee_25m_lawsuit_neighbor_death/ https://www.theregister.com/2019/03/20/mcafee_25m_lawsuit_ne...
- bennyp101 5y agoOk. hand wavey Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? And he poisoned 4 dogs, people get rather angry about their pets. But yea, killing over it is extreme. Still, seems an odd thing to extradite him for. Maybe more to the story which we will never know.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ska 5y ago> Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? The history of trying to define things like "torture" as what the "good guys" don't do has a long an storied past, none of it successful.
- spacechild1 5y ago> Tasered is not torture, else surely cops wouldn't use it? You know, a cop would taser you once for a few seconds. That poor guy got tasered repeatedly, including his genitalia. How is this not torture?
- Miner49er 5y ago> You know, a cop would taser you once for a few seconds. Most of the time. Cops are known to torture people with tasers in the US by using them for long periods of time or repeatedly.
- panopticon 5y ago
- cpursley 5y agoWhy did he kill his neighbor?
- MauranKilom 5y agoAccording to news story: McAffee's dogs kept terrorizing people on the beach, neighbor poisoned dogs, McAffee hired hitman to torture and kill neighbor.
- mc32 5y agoThere were some very disturbing allegations against him --which is why I included his fall from grace and the good or bad. I would just add some skepticism to the charges only because the police down there can be corrupt and or inept and subject to bribery and so on. I don't know if there has been an independent international inquiry into the matter. Anyway, I think it's sad to see people when they throw away all the earned achievements in such a debauched way.
- seppin 5y agoThe good: creating anti-virus software that crashed your work machine once a day. The bad: murder and rape. I don't think those things even remotely cancel each other out.
- FireBeyond 5y ago> I would just add some skepticism to the charges only because the police down there can be corrupt and or inept and subject to bribery and so on. I don't know if there has been an independent international inquiry into the matter. A US federal judge found him culpable for a murder civilly.
- Railsify 5y agoA US federal judge finding anything adds no validity to the claim.
- JoeQuery 5y agoWhy not?
- imwillofficial 5y agoNot OP, but due to the low quality of judicial product lately
- drdeca 5y ago
- mrtksn 5y agoIf you are rich enough you are eccentric and colorful.
- teach 5y ago“He's mad?" "Sort of mad. But mad with lots of money." "Ah, then he can’t be mad. I've been around; if a man has lots of money he's just eccentric.” ― Terry Pratchett, The Light Fantastic
- pineaux 5y agogreat book
- heliodor 5y agoMoney enables what's already there.
- jl6 5y agoIn pecunia veritas.
- mrosett 5y agoThe obvious point you're making is about a double standard -- rich people are unfairly given more slack than others. But an alternative framing amounts to evaluating a method by its results -- basically saying "I don't know why you're behaving that way, but for reasons I don't understand it seems to work for you." That obviously falls apart if you can cleanly separate their wealth/financial success from their behavior e.g. because they inherited the money.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mrtksn 5y agoI was actually referring to the slack given to him for apparent murder and putting the police force on a payroll. “killing your neighbor, bribing the police and never serving a single day for it? What an eccentric person you are”
- prvc 5y agoYou're saying "likely" as a hedge, when in fact you are instead merely expressing an opinion, without any knowledge of the actual numerical likelihood of such an event having happened.
- steego 5y agoI believe that’s how most people in society invoke a numerically void word like the word “likely”. Call my cynical, but time and experience has taught me that people do not back up qualifying words with the appropriate level of mathematical rigor. It’s as if they want to express an opinion without doing the leg work or providing any citations. Had he invested the time to calculate an estimate of likelihood, I’m willing to bet an estimate or confidence interval would have been parenthetically inserted into his remarks. That’s what my experience tells me. YMMV
- BitwiseFool 5y ago"people do not back up qualifying words with the appropriate level of mathematical rigor." To be fair, how in the world am I supposed to calculate such things and provide a satisfactory number? The vast majority of my conversations and discourse don't require or benefit from giving a range or specific value to such words. Would the preceding sentence be better if I said 90%, 95%, 99.5% instead of 'vast majority'? And to be honest, most people - especially myself - aren't at all accurate with probability estimates, let alone calculations.
- jonathankoren 5y ago> To be fair, how in the world am I supposed to calculate such things and provide a satisfactory number? I take it you're not a Bayesian. ;)
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y agoWould you have preferred the poster express a specific probability that they hold their belief at?
- 5y ago
- seppin 5y agoAnd a long history of probable sexual assault / rape.
- jb775 5y agoGuilty until proven innocent?
- browningstreet 5y agoWell, technically, that can't happen now..
- azernik 5y agoThat's a legal standard, not a social or historical one.
- jjk166 5y agoIt's a logical standard. You can't prove a negative (ie that you didn't do something and thus are innocent), so the burden of proof must always be on those making a claim to show that it is true. While it might not be as dangerous for the gossip column to employ fallacious reasoning as it would be for a court of law, that doesn't stop it from being wrong.
- amanaplanacanal 5y agoOutside the courtroom everybody makes judgements based on the balance of evidence, because we can’t possibly know enough facts to pass the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard.
- azernik 5y ago"Beyond a reasonable doubt" isn't even the only standard of proof in a courtroom! That's only for criminal cases.
- unishark 5y agoYou mean like people judging others on Twitter based on gossip and quotes out of context? Society could do a lot better by imitating the justice system standards a bit more. The system was created that way for important ethical reasons.
- poisonarena 5y agoyeah but the guy poisoned his dogs right?