Oh, OK, almost said :-) (But he should have!) What he actually said was something like
"We can design a system that is proof against accident and stupidity, but not one that is proof against deliberate malice." But I prefer my version TBH. On 31 March 2014 10:00, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: > On 31 March 2014 04:27, John Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 1:11 AM, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Back in 2007 the United Nations issued a report on climate change, it >>>> said that by 2100 things would be between 2 and 4.5 degrees warmer than >>>> now, a rather large amount of uncertainty; but after spending millions of >>>> dollars and 7 years of hard work they just issued a new report, and their >>>> uncertainty has actually INCREASED. Now they say between 1.5 and 4.5. >>>> >>> >>> > Doesn't exactly comport with the theory that it's all an >>> environmentalist conspiracy, does it. >> >> >> I know of no such environmental conspiracy, it takes brains to be a >> successful conspirator. As Napoleon said "Never ascribe to malice that >> which is adequately explained by incompetence". >> > > Or as Arthur C Clarke said, > > "Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice." > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
