3 ms·

Self defense, manslaughter, second degree, first degree... Intent and reason is quite important. It is the difference between receiving no punishment and rece

Self defense, manslaughter, second degree, first degree... Intent and reason is quite important. It is the difference between receiving no punishment and receiving the death penalty (in places that still have it).

zamalek 11y ago
Notwithstanding that the intricate technicalities of killing someone was what I was going for at all, how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours? I get it. The anecdote had technical issues. Not-with-standing that being technically correct is not what anecdotes are about in the first place.
- true_religion 11y ago
  > how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours? One way this happens is.... people open HN, click on a few links to open them up in tabs, then get distracted by work or other things. An hour or two later, they don't refresh the page and just make comments based on what they see. I'm guilty of it too sometimes.
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  >how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours? Honestly. I respond as I read. I tend not to keep reading and then go back to respond. >Not-with-standing that being technically correct is not what anecdotes are about in the first place. This is more than a mere technicality. The whole issue of mens rea is that one's state of mind is a factor is how someone is judged for their actions. Your point, even without the analogy issue, is that the reason is irrelevant. That is simply not the case. Putting a security flaw in place to give the FBI a backdoor is vastly different than putting a security flaw in place due to poor coding. You may say they are both the same in that they both compromised security, but only one of these is backdooring and the damage to one's reputation is going to be different. Now, in this particular case, the reason isn't sufficient to warrant a different judgment. But that is because of the details of this case.

zamalek 11y ago

Notwithstanding that the intricate technicalities of killing someone was what I was going for at all, how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours? I get it. The anecdote had technical issues. Not-with-standing that being technically correct is not what anecdotes are about in the first place.

true_religion 11y ago
> how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours? One way this happens is.... people open HN, click on a few links to open them up in tabs, then get distracted by work or other things. An hour or two later, they don't refresh the page and just make comments based on what they see. I'm guilty of it too sometimes.
Lawtonfogle 11y ago
>how did you miss the two other comments that repeated this information nearly an hour before yours? Honestly. I respond as I read. I tend not to keep reading and then go back to respond. >Not-with-standing that being technically correct is not what anecdotes are about in the first place. This is more than a mere technicality. The whole issue of mens rea is that one's state of mind is a factor is how someone is judged for their actions. Your point, even without the analogy issue, is that the reason is irrelevant. That is simply not the case. Putting a security flaw in place to give the FBI a backdoor is vastly different than putting a security flaw in place due to poor coding. You may say they are both the same in that they both compromised security, but only one of these is backdooring and the damage to one's reputation is going to be different. Now, in this particular case, the reason isn't sufficient to warrant a different judgment. But that is because of the details of this case.