5 ms·

“quality seems good” is the point of contention here; how would you know? You’re either already knowledgeable about this topic and therefore necessarily didn’t

by Zetice 3y ago

“quality seems good” is the point of contention here; how would you know? You’re either already knowledgeable about this topic and therefore necessarily didn’t learn it from here or you’re not and therefore unqualified to judge its quality at all.

worksonmine 3y ago
That applies to everything we learn. Most of us use previous experience to make an educated guess. Someone just coming into software won't be reading this, but it can be good start to know what one could dig deeper into. Most content on any topic is bullshit, and in tech quickly outdated. What's your gripe with this particular one? I have several similar repos starred for future reference, because why not? Could be useful. You never answered how you learn? Because I assume you still do? Since you have opinions on how others do it maybe you have better approaches you'd like to share?
- Zetice 3y ago
  Could be useful? Could be misleading, wrong, outdated, manipulated… there’s a reason these people are self publishing. You asking me how I learn is the very problem, in fact. When the consequences of being wrong are basically zero, the incentives are not aligned for me to provide you with anything resembling quality. Avoid individuals entirely, and focus on institutions who are meaningfully harmed by their inaccuracy if discovered.
  - worksonmine 3y ago
    You seem to have high views of institutions, and low self-esteem on your own ability to assess information. Take nothing at face value, and learn from multiple sources. Those institutions you claim have no incentives are just as likely trying to monetize you and lock you into their walled gardens. To each their own I guess.
    - Zetice 3y ago
      Nope! You entirely misunderstand; it’s about incentive and consequence, not self esteem or reverence. Those institutions exist as a result of their reputation, and that reputation is harmed by giving bad instruction. This random Internet stranger has no reputation whatsoever, so there is zero incentive for them to operate honestly, beyond whatever self imposed morality they may have. Your method relies on good nature and blind faith, and leaves you open to manipulation, ignorance and misunderstanding; what I describe uses societal forces and self interest to ensure quality. I’m sure you can guess which had better outcomes…
      - worksonmine 3y ago
        > Your method relies on good nature and blind faith, and leaves you open to manipulation, ignorance and misunderstanding; what I describe uses societal forces and self interest to ensure quality. I’m sure you can guess which had better outcomes… Is that how you read "take nothing at face value"? I question everything, so should you. Which are these infamous institutions you praise? Maybe some of them are among the sources this random internet stranger referenced at the end? Linus Thorvalds once was a random internet stranger, now the world runs on his kernel. Your world view is very black/white. Most of the best content I've read are from random internet strangers, and not institutions. They're often from hands-on experience and not written for PR purposes.
        Zetice 3y ago
        You continue to misunderstand. The concept is a simple one; stop blindly trusting strangers, start finding groups that have a monetary incentive to be accurate. If you can’t grasp the concept of incentive alignment, system design is probably the least of your worries.
        worksonmine 3y ago
        I'm not misunderstanding anything, you're claiming I am just to "win" some internet points. How many times do I have to write "don't take anything at face value"? I assess the content (from multiple sources) not the messenger, of course the messenger counts but that goes both ways (bias is a thing). You claim Docker is pushing Docker desktop over Podman or even their own daemon is out of goodwill and not for telemetry? You have to go out of your way to find the instructions for just the daemon without the bloat. But you're paranoid some blog will trick you into running 'rm -rf /' as root because the source is an "individual"? (straw-man yes, but lacking examples I have to make one up). You won't even provide a single example of a better source when asked, just hand-waving "institutions good, individuals bad". There's nothing constructive in this chain, and we're going in circles. I'm genuinely curious of your examples, so if you want to be constructive instead of focusing on my worries please provide some. If not, I wish you the best day.
  - voxl 3y ago
    > there’s a reason these people are self publishing. ??? What in the paranoia is this, do you think the same of Jeff Erickson who self publishes his book on Algorithms? Or no, because he's a professor? I get that you need to use surface-level signals to determine if something is worth your time, but the opposite is not "this is crap" the opposite is "I don't know if this is good"
    - Zetice 3y ago
      Where did I say this was crap?

by Zetice 3y ago

worksonmine 3y ago

That applies to everything we learn. Most of us use previous experience to make an educated guess. Someone just coming into software won't be reading this, but it can be good start to know what one could dig deeper into. Most content on any topic is bullshit, and in tech quickly outdated. What's your gripe with this particular one? I have several similar repos starred for future reference, because why not? Could be useful. You never answered how you learn? Because I assume you still do? Since you have opinions on how others do it maybe you have better approaches you'd like to share?

Zetice 3y ago
Could be useful? Could be misleading, wrong, outdated, manipulated… there’s a reason these people are self publishing. You asking me how I learn is the very problem, in fact. When the consequences of being wrong are basically zero, the incentives are not aligned for me to provide you with anything resembling quality. Avoid individuals entirely, and focus on institutions who are meaningfully harmed by their inaccuracy if discovered.
- worksonmine 3y ago
  You seem to have high views of institutions, and low self-esteem on your own ability to assess information. Take nothing at face value, and learn from multiple sources. Those institutions you claim have no incentives are just as likely trying to monetize you and lock you into their walled gardens. To each their own I guess.
  - Zetice 3y ago
    Nope! You entirely misunderstand; it’s about incentive and consequence, not self esteem or reverence. Those institutions exist as a result of their reputation, and that reputation is harmed by giving bad instruction. This random Internet stranger has no reputation whatsoever, so there is zero incentive for them to operate honestly, beyond whatever self imposed morality they may have. Your method relies on good nature and blind faith, and leaves you open to manipulation, ignorance and misunderstanding; what I describe uses societal forces and self interest to ensure quality. I’m sure you can guess which had better outcomes…
    - worksonmine 3y ago
      > Your method relies on good nature and blind faith, and leaves you open to manipulation, ignorance and misunderstanding; what I describe uses societal forces and self interest to ensure quality. I’m sure you can guess which had better outcomes… Is that how you read "take nothing at face value"? I question everything, so should you. Which are these infamous institutions you praise? Maybe some of them are among the sources this random internet stranger referenced at the end? Linus Thorvalds once was a random internet stranger, now the world runs on his kernel. Your world view is very black/white. Most of the best content I've read are from random internet strangers, and not institutions. They're often from hands-on experience and not written for PR purposes.
      - Zetice 3y ago
        You continue to misunderstand. The concept is a simple one; stop blindly trusting strangers, start finding groups that have a monetary incentive to be accurate. If you can’t grasp the concept of incentive alignment, system design is probably the least of your worries.
        worksonmine 3y ago
        I'm not misunderstanding anything, you're claiming I am just to "win" some internet points. How many times do I have to write "don't take anything at face value"? I assess the content (from multiple sources) not the messenger, of course the messenger counts but that goes both ways (bias is a thing). You claim Docker is pushing Docker desktop over Podman or even their own daemon is out of goodwill and not for telemetry? You have to go out of your way to find the instructions for just the daemon without the bloat. But you're paranoid some blog will trick you into running 'rm -rf /' as root because the source is an "individual"? (straw-man yes, but lacking examples I have to make one up). You won't even provide a single example of a better source when asked, just hand-waving "institutions good, individuals bad". There's nothing constructive in this chain, and we're going in circles. I'm genuinely curious of your examples, so if you want to be constructive instead of focusing on my worries please provide some. If not, I wish you the best day.
- voxl 3y ago
  > there’s a reason these people are self publishing. ??? What in the paranoia is this, do you think the same of Jeff Erickson who self publishes his book on Algorithms? Or no, because he's a professor? I get that you need to use surface-level signals to determine if something is worth your time, but the opposite is not "this is crap" the opposite is "I don't know if this is good"
  - Zetice 3y ago
    Where did I say this was crap?