@pmarca And not sure how you snuck in the word "wrong" into my definition. Incomplete understanding != possibility of being wrong.
-
-
-
@pmarca "incomplete understanding" applies to ENTIRE system that could possibly be impacted. Not just arbitrary delineation of "my piece."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@pmarca it's incapacity for accepting unknowns (less than omniscience) in situations that makes someone a non-hacker per my definition.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca new definition: VC: someone who won't take yes for an answer.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca you're mistaking sufficiency in definition for necessity... willingness to be wrong != requirement to be wrong.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca You're claiming omniscience for hackers, and *I'm* reaching? Heh!Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca and I am saying that's okay in my definition so long as they don't insist on only working on things where they have omniscience.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca Ah yes, but they are not afraid to hack on ones they don't.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca and also, tech interconnectedness ==> every tech is all tech in a way.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@pmarca yes, but unafraid of *what*? failure, breaking things, proving own incompetence, right? == incomplete understanding/irreversibilityThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.