When a lawyer says "reckless" it's an extremely strong word. It doesn't mean "negligent", IANAL (and it depends on the state etc) but it's more like if you knowingly run over a pedestrian in your way, and you aren't trying to hurt them but don't care if they get hurt. And often criminal law will treat it as just a little less bad than intent.
replyIt very much depends on where the lawyer is. What you’ve described would be more like “depraved heart” or “wicked recklessness” in jurisdictions that have it, where reckless was that you were doing 90 in a residential area. I think the point is more that the legal term “reckless” may have a specific meaning in given places.
replyHow does this work though. At the end of the day, you can’t as a CEO say “I didn’t know” when your whole operating model is a scam.
replyYes. So many of her replies to Nathan's questions were "I don't know" or "I don't remember" or "I don't understand" for questions that were very straightforward.
replyAt her level of responsibility she'd better know. Whatever the case, she's either deceitful or incompetent. Neither answer is flattering or acceptable.
It's manufactured incompetence. You can see it a lot in companies who use a lot of subcontractors.
replyDeceitful vs delusional or incompetent matters for your legal defense, your parole hearing etc
reply> At the end of the day, you can’t as a CEO say “I didn’t know” when your whole operating model is a scam.
replyThere's always the chance one could have ridden fake-it-till-you-make-it long enough for the engineers to solve the underlying issues...
While far from a complete technical breakdown, Hank Green's recent video on Theranos is a good starting point. These are not serious people. The special sauce has never been the self promotion.
replyIt is one thing to fake and misrepresent the completeness of a video game, but it is entirely another to provide false or unverified medical results to patients.
replyIn virtually every company there are questions you intuitively know that your managers don't necessarily want to know the answers to (or at least, they only want to know the answers to them if you have a solution), usually it's something relatively trivial like minor infractions of corporate rules.
replyThere are some leaders who are extremely good at convincing you about the importance of belief in a particular thing to the point where you avoid even thinking up those questions - if they are ever cornered (and they rarely allow it to get to that point) they will wriggle endlessly rather than responding to a line of inquiry that bursts the collective bubble.
Do they know? It's hard to argue about their internal motivations.