= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Will_Newsome comments on (Virtual) Employment Open Thread - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (276)
Hm? I'm thinking about selling things via an internet store, and the worst I can imagine happening is being asked to take down the site. Which is still pretty bad. What am I missing?
There is a fair amount of legal risk you assume when you sell ingestibles.
Sorry, I shouldn't have made that so personal.
I'm just saying that "technically legal" is not a useful category. You made it clear that you don't think it provides protection, which is the main point. It might provide indignation, which is a double-edged sword. What "will arouse suspicion" is a useful category. "Wrong intent" is not a good category because they can't see your intent.