Dalke, first off, thank you for your exhaustive explanation. I might question you on a few points, but right now it would seem senseless as I don't really have anything that I disagree with relating to what you've said and you seem far more knowledgeable about the subject.
My question stemmed from my misunderstanding of the law and a curiousness about how my knowledge gaps might be exploitable (though not as much for harm but rather protection). Thank you for taking the time to give me such a thorough answer.
I was somewhat apprehensive to post my first question to HN, (especially one that even mentioned religion) but you definitely gave me the best response I could have hoped for. I definitely owe you one. Thank you.
Comments
Dalke, first off, thank you for your exhaustive explanation. I might question you on a few points, but right now it would seem senseless as I don't really have anything that I disagree with relating to what you've said and you seem far more knowledgeable about the subject.
My question stemmed from my misunderstanding of the law and a curiousness about how my knowledge gaps might be exploitable (though not as much for harm but rather protection). Thank you for taking the time to give me such a thorough answer.
I was somewhat apprehensive to post my first question to HN, (especially one that even mentioned religion) but you definitely gave me the best response I could have hoped for. I definitely owe you one. Thank you.
You're welcome. Glad you found my response informative.
HN commenters are indeed a fickle and random group.
Cheers.