"At last I went to the artisans, for I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things; and in this I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets; because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed their wisdom (...)"
Hating is easy. All you have to do is point fingers at people and tell them they know nothing. 100% of the time you'll be right.
Am I just not aware of the HN equivalent for medical doctors?
Relevant article: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/11/30/book-review-inadequate...
More importantly, that's not really Central to the argument of the book he's reviewing or the argument of his post itself, it's a mostly irrelevant detail that you've picked on for no discernable reason.
> Eliezer Yudkowsky’s catchily-titled Inadequate Equilibria is many things. It’s a look into whether there is any role for individual reason in a world where you can always just trust expert consensus. It’s an analysis of the efficient market hypothesis and how it relates to the idea of low-hanging fruit. It’s a self-conscious defense of the author’s own arrogance.
And then quote again the only reference to the EMH:
> It’s an analysis of the efficient market hypothesis and how it relates to the idea of low-hanging fruit.
How, just how can you say something 'bedobi upthread? It's frankly a "fake news" level comment. I hate those, because it looks legit enough that people will take the lie at face value.
Compared to what? What you'd have on a forum of economists or doctors? Maybe. What you would be reading otherwise? Not quite.
> everyone here is apparently a Nobel grade expert.
Maybe not Nobel-grade, but there's plenty of actual doctors on HN.