Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"instead, we have the misguided actions and interactions of generally well-meaning people that are so segregated from the big picture and scared of losing their jobs that they make mistakes which snowball."

That's a pretty generous supposition ... in regard to both intent and competency.



I'd much rather assume derpiness than malice.

If we assume malice, well, that puts all kinds of interesting moral burdens on us, right? Better to assume agents mean well than that they are actively hostile--it is much easier to reason about.


Why does it have to be one or the other? Isn't it reasonable to assume some are competent, some are incompetent, and others are malicious?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: