>What does “take full responsibility” mean in the present context?

I posted something that -- in hindsight -- I shouldn't have, and it had repercussions for a lot of people. An action that I took had considerable knock-in effects around the world.

Some outlets are reporting that my action of posting something that I believed to be in good faith was an indicator or catalyst for the embargo to be tossed out and a previously-agreed schedule to change in short order.

That's not a normal Wednesday for me. Not even vaguely. I've not slept well since, and my taking ownership with an apology is this new course of action. Hopefully I'll sleep tonight.

re: assets and peonage – I am but a broke & wizened nerd with no known descendants. If you're ever in Cornwall, UK: look me up, I'll gladly buy you a sleep-friendly beverage. And I’m not being facetious.

It means they agree they are culpable in the specified activity, and are ready to accept its consequences. The consequences depend on the nature of the activity and the actors involved. If the activity was illegal, they agree to be charged with the crime. If the activity was unethical, they agree to be censured by their peers. If the activity was uncompassionate or immoral, they agree that their standing in community may be affected accordingly.

But most importantly, by assigning blame, they have cleared the contention at hand, taking the critical first step towards resolution of the matter. Without this, the issue may simply be stuck in limbo, taking up valuable time and resources and may never be resolved even. By acknowledging their mistake, they also wish to signal to others that they have learnt a peronsal lesson and would try to avoid making the same mistake in future. So it carries a lot of implications and is not an empty phrase at all.

Sure there may be people who throw around the phrase lightly, whether one believes them or not depends on how they are viewed in the eyes of others. So unless there is reason to believe otherwise, I would give them the benefit of doubt. If you want to imagine a world where the concept of "taking responsibility" doesn't exist, look at politicians. Is that how we want our society to function?

> What does “take full responsibility” mean in the present context?

Aside from Pete's reply (see adjacent comment), I'd add that him taking full responsibility is also his way of saying his post was nobody else's fault but his.

In other words it's less about forfeiting assets and descendant peonage, and more about saying "the buck stops with me".

At least that's my read of his sentiment. Pete can expand if need be.

I think its just an acknowledgement that they screwed up (as opposed to trying to hedge by claiming its really someone elses fault).

So many people give non-apologies where they say sorry while also trying to deflect blame elsewhere, i think it speaks well of this person they are not doing that.

You're ignoring and severely underestimating social responsibility and social consequences.

Exactly, full responsibility implies paying for damages.

Taking responsibility for a mistake is neither meaningless nor empty, but honorable. The very essence of humanity.

It does NOT mean "He agrees to settle any financial claims against himself or his employer, for damages caused by negligence".

Could have said "I blame only myself for this mistake, nothing else needs to change".

This will keep happening until the system where this can happen runs out of willing scapegoats.