3 ms·

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 engi

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.
  - inimino 7y ago
    > Am I misrepresenting anything in your position here? Yes. 1) I never said "no value". The claims have value. Call it 2 bits per claim, with diminishing returns after the first few. 2) The Intel engineer has considerably more context, and more on the line, so their claim has considerably more weight. Call it... 8 bits. If they say it should work, then it should work, and if other people say it doesn't work, that doesn't mean someone is wrong, it might just mean that it should work, but for someone it isn't working, for whatever other reasons. 3) If the Intel engineer tells you your opinion is wrong or out of date, you should probably give that considerably more weight than if some random person on the internet without that context says it. The engineer working in the field can be expected to know a lot more about both the intended design, the actual build, and the real-world issues arising in practice compared to what any individual user would know about any of those things. This is generally why experts don't like to engage with non-experts; the non-experts' priors on who to trust are likely to be all out of whack.

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.
- inimino 7y ago
  > Am I misrepresenting anything in your position here? Yes. 1) I never said "no value". The claims have value. Call it 2 bits per claim, with diminishing returns after the first few. 2) The Intel engineer has considerably more context, and more on the line, so their claim has considerably more weight. Call it... 8 bits. If they say it should work, then it should work, and if other people say it doesn't work, that doesn't mean someone is wrong, it might just mean that it should work, but for someone it isn't working, for whatever other reasons. 3) If the Intel engineer tells you your opinion is wrong or out of date, you should probably give that considerably more weight than if some random person on the internet without that context says it. The engineer working in the field can be expected to know a lot more about both the intended design, the actual build, and the real-world issues arising in practice compared to what any individual user would know about any of those things. This is generally why experts don't like to engage with non-experts; the non-experts' priors on who to trust are likely to be all out of whack.