Hacker News Reader

>Taking the point further, can anyone think of a mechanism by which the paper has a positive effect?

Yes - by reinforcing in people that confidence is disjoint from competence, and that 'trust-but-verify' is the best policy when evaluating people's competence.

View on HN

Remember the old greek that knew he knew nothing? You don't sound like him. If you don't approach the issue - unawareness of one's incompetence - with humility, I'm sorry, but there's really one thing you are. You're confident. Now of course. Me pointing this out is moot, or is it? Maybe: I don't claim I knew anything other than what both of us already know, which is what, according to the former greek, actually counts. Or is it?

I'm not claiming competence in anything. All I am doing is saying that when evaluating competence that you should test the thing you are looking for - competence - and not accept confidence as a substitute or proxy for competence.

The way I wanted to make it look was that those who thought they knew what they were talking about have no way of knowing on which side of the pond they were. :)

EDIT: ...because your tools are useless in the face of ignorance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com