3 ms·
The only meaningful response is to tell you that your question is rhetorical. Every product is a snowflake, etc. Your product's brand will inform the structure
by thenerdfiles 13y ago
The only meaningful response is to tell you that your question is rhetorical.
Every product is a snowflake, etc. Your product's brand will inform the structure of the content for that answer.
That said, sprinkle on a little hegemony, you've got yourself State Source (code) — as opposed to Open Source (code).
How should I know ?
- mistermann 13y agoHow about we stop speaking in riddles.
- thenerdfiles 13y agoThe point isn't about the content of one person's definition of felony. It's about the lengths we will go to break a stacked deck. It's about prima facie privacy. [EDIT: And who should be afforded that prima facie privacy. (We're obviously going to cherry-pick based on arbitrary characteristics like "shady".)]
- thenerdfiles 13y agoAlso: The riddle does not exist. If a question can be put at all, then it can also be answered. —Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus I'm not saying these things to entertain or prompt a hackers' game of philosophy. I'm showing you the problem. My definition of "felony" is irrelevant, and (again) not the point. — "What is a 'felony' to you?" is not a real question; I am not a legal system.
- demallien 13y agoYou weren't asked for a definition of "felony" you were asked a reasonable question about what you meant by "negligeable felony" - most likely because most of us would be willing to accept someone done for shoplifting a pack of cigarettes when they were 17 (as an example). Why are you dodging the question? At least to me, it makes you seem like a shifty politician trying to hide her agenda.
- mkmkmmmmm 13y agoIn uni a number of young philosophers attempted to sound intelligent by saying nothing in a cryptic manner. It worked pretty well for them.
- thenerdfiles 13y agoOh, I've said that before. In the end, nothing beats a Classical education.
- JonnieCache 13y agoClassical works are generally quite clear and lucid, once you understand the language. It's postmodernism you're thinking of.
- thenerdfiles 13y agoClear and lucid. Is that stuff anything like Descartes' "clear" _and_ "distinct" ideas? Fascinating. Do you know of posey? It's right good stuff, even on Sundays.
- thenerdfiles 13y agoNo. "Negiligible felony" and "felony" will incite the same quibble. The point is having a history as a felon, period. I'm dodging the question because you should be focused on the "shady" characteristic. Even a morally reprehensible felon can appear non-shady. And a "shady" person with "negiligible" felony probably overly skews or augments their own perception of it, which makes them appear even "shadier" than they would without the felony, whatever its stripe. Whatever the case, "felony", whatever its qualification, has a legal (non-personal) meaning, and it only has a meaning in that sense. Look at GEM Anscombe's distiction of institutional and brute facts. There's no such thing as a "brute fact" of felony.
- antimagic 13y agoNo, they won't incite the same quibble, because "felony" has a very precise legal definition. A "negligible" felony is going to have a different meaning for each person that uses it, so you're going to need to define what you mean when you use the word. I agree with the other commenters, why are you dodging this so much?
- dinkumthinkum 13y agoI think there are some mental health issues to be worked on.
- tzs 13y agoWait a second here. He asked you what a "negligible" felony is, and you say: > How should I know ? He's asking because you wrote "If an African American man walked into your startup, given some negligible* felony history". Are you now implying that when you wrote that, you had no idea what you meant by it?
- thenerdfiles 13y ago"shady look" — "shady look" — "shady look" As I said above, even a negligible felony can be augmented or skewed by the felon, thus making them appear "shadier". What you ultimately find out about the felony is irrelevant to the fact that you've just breached the trust of a potential relationship.
- dinkumthinkum 13y agoThis is insanity.
- thenerdfiles 13y agoHow is this helpful? Did you not see the slides on the pervasiveness of mental health problems in the hacker community? Are you not aware of the sociological and psychological problems that come with widespread surveillance? (What do you say to someone who genuinely asks you: Do you think technology is going to take over?) What is "healthy" supposed to look like? Do you even know? I think it's a sign of an uncritical mind that simply makes unjustified value judgments, with loaded, quasi-medical terminology, in the face of an increasingly apparent reality. Dude, grow out of your IDE. You have no right to say what is "insanity".
- lttlrck 13y agoWhy do you afford him no right to label something 'insanity'? A word you yourself say is quasi-medical?