4 ms·

There's a difference. As the quote goes: "don't loan something you can't afford to lose". Carmack, it seems, was comfortable with not being paid back.

• maccard 4y ago
  > Carmack, it seems, was comfortable with not being paid back. That's not how I read the tweet, at all. > It was a learning experience for me, calibrating some general people behavior. I don’t think anyone intended to not pay me back, but things often just don’t work out the way you plan
  • gowld 4y ago
    How do you read the tweet? It seems pretty clear that he knew that getting paid back wasn't very highly probable, and he learned about how recipients handle that.
    • fragmede 4y ago
      More to the point, Carmack was comfortable - had a house and was able to put food on the table for his loved ones - without being paid back. It's possible that, contrary to what that tweet says, Carmack demanded (his) money (back). By Western measures, however, he's still comfortable without being paid back.
      • hjm 4y ago
        >It's possible that, contrary to what that tweet says, Carmack demanded (his) money (back) Nah, he's not like that.
  • AceJohnny2 4y ago
    Ah yes, on second read, your interpretation seems better. Decades of practice and I feel like my reading comprehension just gets worse :(
    • maccard 4y ago
      Nah, reading is hard, particularly when nuance is distilled into 280 characters. Only way we'll ever know is to ask Carmack himself I guess