Ah, excellent reply. This is what makes HN worth savoring.
You certainly have a point. And I would agree that in medical matters, or in other situations where an expert opinion is warranted, it's worth taking credentialism into account.
But there are a few people on HN without credentials who are excellent programmers. What makes them excellent? If you had to figure out a hard design, or build something quickly (as opposed to rock-solid reliably), are you sure the first person you'd go to is a Harvard grad? Even if you had the money. I've met enough to know that they're smart, but you can get within a stone's throw of their skill on your own.
Let's start with a story. My tooth hurt, for days. Terrible shooting pain. I remember waking up and jumping up and down crying due to how absolutely excruciating it was. This isn't artistic exaggeration.
I go to the dentist. Tooth's godda come out. But what made me hesitate was how quickly this determination was made. She took one glance at the xray and said "This tooth needs to be extracted." Instantly.
I go home and wait, and bear the pain a bit. The pain goes away, and I forget about it for awhile.
A few months later, it comes back. I go to a different dentist. Same exact situation.
For lucky reasons, I could not arrange the operation. I say "lucky" because I still have that tooth, and that was four years ago. If I had listened to credentials, I would be one less tooth and none the wiser.
This was quite striking, and it has always made me wonder why we have this absolute faith in the systems we participate in. It works most of the time. It's a pretty good rule of thumb. But the special cases are what makes life interesting, and most systems are remarkably bad at evaluating those.
What does all of this have to do with whether some rando should have an opinion about Google? Well, that rando might be right. And the only way to figure that out is to think about it and decide for yourself.