Hacker News Reader

Comment by sophacles | Hacker News Reader

They were wrong, factually incorrect. That is not lying. Lying implies intent to deceive. Speaking factually incorrect things if you believe them to be true is honest but incorrect.

Do you shame your kids by calling them liars every time the get something wrong on their homework? Do schools kick you out for violating the code of conduct (which usually includes some language about honesty with faculty and administration) every time you get marks off on a test because of factual incorrectness?

Are people who write code with bugs just dirty liars, because the documentation says it will do this, but a bug means that in some cases it fails?

View on HN

> Speaking factually incorrect things if you believe them to be true is honest but incorrect.

In ordinary conversation, yes, of course. But not in advertising copy. As to the latter, one cannot claim ignorance.

Try your position in a court of law after someone holds you responsible for an "innocent misstatement of fact" in advertising copy that leads to sales based on a false premise, and/or that causes injury.

Interestingly, about the difference between false statements and lying, this played a part in a scandal at West Point a few years ago, in which some students didn't realize the point you make about ordinary conversation -- lying must be intentional falsehood, with knowledge that the statement is false.

Nevertheless, someone who writes advertising copy can't claim this protection.

> Are people who write code with bugs just dirty liars ...

That's not the same at all. A programming bug isn't an intentional statement, whether true or false. A closer comparison would be someone speaking a word in a language he doesn't actually understand, and not realizing he's used the wrong word.

You are moving the goalposts from "lying" to "being accountable". "I did not lie, so I should walk free" is not, in general, a valid argument in court (but it can work in defamation suits. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#Defences)

"You lied, so you should be convicted" isn't true, either. If it were illegal, why do people have to take an oath in court?

Lying may be morally or ethically bad, but in itself, the law is fine with it.

> If it were illegal, why do people have to take an oath in court?

A number of reasons:

* So they can't claim ignorance of the law.

* Because lying in court is such a commonplace that the court system decided a timely reminder would be wise.

* Finally, some statements that are lies can't be prosecuted, for example, anything not material to the issues being discussed. On that basis, the oath stands as a clarification of what is legal and illegal in that specific context.

In spite of the above, lying under oath is very common. It's a rule of thumb that judges will rule against liars rather than try to prosecute them.

> Lying may be morally or ethically bad, but in itself, the law is fine with it.

Yes -- except (two examples) under oath or while filing a police report.

No, but my kids aren't asking for money based upon wrong claims, whether they know or don't. However, as adults, especially when you are pitching an idea looking for funding, you are expected to be factually correct. Being factually wrong, and then claiming ignorance isn't going to help build confidence in investors. Caveat emptor applies alright, but really, we aren't in grade school to actually let ignorance be an excuse here, especially given they are soliciting funds.

I never said ignorance was an excuse. I never said "oh they were just wrong - go invest". Asking for money based on incorrect claims could be labeled idiocy, but it's not lying.

In fact - I wasn't making any comments on the gravity light thing at all. I was simply questioning a poster's odd use of the word lying. I haven't a clue how you are able to turn that bit of semantics discussion into a defense of the product, but I respectfully suggest you turn down your paranoia - you are seeing a scam where there wasn't even a request for money/favor/work.

> Speaking factually incorrect things if you believe them to be true is honest but incorrect.

That seems to be too lenient. If I honestly believe in God's healing powers or homeopathy, am I off the hook for failing to bring my child to the ER when he has a serious illness?

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-belief/

This has been discussed a lot, in cases like Jehova's Witnesses refusal, for example in the event of pregnancy.

http://jdwmed.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/ethics-paper4.pdf

> Are people who write code with bugs just dirty liars, because the documentation says it will do this, but a bug means that in some cases it fails?

Yes. Dirty, dirty liars.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com