3 ms·

Being confident enough to trash-talk based on hearsay is just being arrogant.

jodrellblank 7y ago
Dismissing other people's information and sources without knowing what they are or where they're from, assuming your knowledge is automatically superior, laughing at them, is similarly just being arrogant. And then, after being pushed, admitting you have a vested interest in making them sound better and your job depends on it, isn't a good look.
- apcragg 7y ago
  I mean my sources are the actual 5G Standards, the test equipment I've used, and my knowledge of cellular systems stemming from experience and and formal education so yeah, I think it's a fair assumption that my knowledge is more than "some things I heard". My job does not depend on the success or failure of 5G, I don't know where you got that from.
- inimino 7y ago
  Information is not equally likely to be valid regardless of the source it came from. This is the curse of being an expert (on anything) and engaging with kooks who think they are experts because they read something on the internet. If you had direct experiences and you share them, those shouldn't be ridiculed, but if you pass on information that is not from your direct experience and which people who have direct experience believe to be false... that's also, as you say, "not a good look".
  - jodrellblank 7y ago
    The point is not that information from all sources is equally valid, the point is the parent is dismissing information without knowing what the source even is. I don't know the original commenter, their knowledge, or their source. But as the replying person says "assumption that my knowledge is more" - that is an assumption. Why not check that assumption? Then they go on to say "I mean my sources are the actual 5G Standards," - And it's never been the case that a standards document sounds great, but doesn't work well or is implemented badly? Or tries to address a problem but doesn't? "and on implementing electronics" - so not actual experience of trying it?
    - inimino 7y ago
      > dismissing information without knowing what the source even is What someone says gives a very strong signal for where they heard it. Yes, you could perhaps challenge the relevance of the standards here, but to do that, you would need to provide strong evidence.
      - jodrellblank 7y ago
        I don't follow what you're suggesting; Where are you implying that asciident heard that 5G is "trash technology" and "doesn't work well"? "I heard someone used it and it didn't work well" is the same level of evidence as product reviews, and is strong enough for all of us to make day to day judgements on. "I read the spec and the spec says it should be good" is not strong evidence - all spec would say that, or be revised until it said that. Yet still bad products abound.
        inimino 7y ago
        They picked up some random news articles and some hearsay. Maybe product reviews are where you get your info, then don't be surprised if you talk to actual engineers and they don't have a lot of respect for your opinions.
        jodrellblank 7y ago
        Is it not a common trope on HN itself, the software engineer who stridently argues that their service is good because it has $list-of-tech, ignoring the users who don’t like it?
        jodrellblank 7y ago
        I would edit, but too late; here is a HN recommendation thread about non-Macbook laptops: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20795113 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20795113 In it, there are people saying that Intel - nVidia GPU switching has problems on some laptops. If I take your position as stated: 1) Those claims, by the time they to us, are hearsay and therefore have no value. 2) An Intel engineer stating that they have more knowledge and it should work well, is not hearsay and does have value. 3) Whether the Intel engineer respects the reader or not, matters. Am I misrepresenting anything in your position here? If not, then I feel the opposite about all three points. This isn't about engineer vs user's knowledge, it's about differences between design-intent and real-world result.

Dismissing other people's information and sources without knowing what they are or where they're from, assuming your knowledge is automatically superior, laughing at them, is similarly just being arrogant. And then, after being pushed, admitting you have a vested interest in making them sound better and your job depends on it, isn't a good look.

apcragg 7y ago
I mean my sources are the actual 5G Standards, the test equipment I've used, and my knowledge of cellular systems stemming from experience and and formal education so yeah, I think it's a fair assumption that my knowledge is more than "some things I heard". My job does not depend on the success or failure of 5G, I don't know where you got that from.
inimino 7y ago
Information is not equally likely to be valid regardless of the source it came from. This is the curse of being an expert (on anything) and engaging with kooks who think they are experts because they read something on the internet. If you had direct experiences and you share them, those shouldn't be ridiculed, but if you pass on information that is not from your direct experience and which people who have direct experience believe to be false... that's also, as you say, "not a good look".
- jodrellblank 7y ago
  The point is not that information from all sources is equally valid, the point is the parent is dismissing information without knowing what the source even is. I don't know the original commenter, their knowledge, or their source. But as the replying person says "assumption that my knowledge is more" - that is an assumption. Why not check that assumption? Then they go on to say "I mean my sources are the actual 5G Standards," - And it's never been the case that a standards document sounds great, but doesn't work well or is implemented badly? Or tries to address a problem but doesn't? "and on implementing electronics" - so not actual experience of trying it?
  - inimino 7y ago
    > dismissing information without knowing what the source even is What someone says gives a very strong signal for where they heard it. Yes, you could perhaps challenge the relevance of the standards here, but to do that, you would need to provide strong evidence.
    - jodrellblank 7y ago
      I don't follow what you're suggesting; Where are you implying that asciident heard that 5G is "trash technology" and "doesn't work well"? "I heard someone used it and it didn't work well" is the same level of evidence as product reviews, and is strong enough for all of us to make day to day judgements on. "I read the spec and the spec says it should be good" is not strong evidence - all spec would say that, or be revised until it said that. Yet still bad products abound.
      - inimino 7y ago
        They picked up some random news articles and some hearsay. Maybe product reviews are where you get your info, then don't be surprised if you talk to actual engineers and they don't have a lot of respect for your opinions.
        jodrellblank 7y ago
        Is it not a common trope on HN itself, the software engineer who stridently argues that their service is good because it has $list-of-tech, ignoring the users who don’t like it?
        jodrellblank 7y ago
        I would edit, but too late; here is a HN recommendation thread about non-Macbook laptops: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20795113 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20795113 In it, there are people saying that Intel - nVidia GPU switching has problems on some laptops. If I take your position as stated: 1) Those claims, by the time they to us, are hearsay and therefore have no value. 2) An Intel engineer stating that they have more knowledge and it should work well, is not hearsay and does have value. 3) Whether the Intel engineer respects the reader or not, matters. Am I misrepresenting anything in your position here? If not, then I feel the opposite about all three points. This isn't about engineer vs user's knowledge, it's about differences between design-intent and real-world result.