6 ms·

>Educated people tend to overestimate their abilities outside their domain. This. And HN is the perfect example to observe this phenomenon. I lost track how m

>Educated people tend to overestimate their abilities outside their domain. This. And HN is the perfect example to observe this phenomenon. I lost track how many highly confident but incorrect takes I read here on semiconductor topics from people who assumed they know everything about any tech topic because they earn sich figures from writing crud web software.

smgit 2y ago
Go one step further. Why does that happen?
- laidoffamazon 2y ago
  Ivy Leaguers are trained, often from birth, that they are better than the rest of us plebs because of their “merit” and represent a superhuman caste. This guy was most likely the same way. If you’re told that you’re a superhuman, then why not think you can get away with it?
  - hnbad 2y ago
    Oh, it's not just Ivy League although of course that usually comes with a background of privilege and prestige that further compounds on this tendency. STEM people in general heavily demonstrate this tendency. MBA types too, although they tend to think the solution always comes down to treating everything as a business or privatization.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      This is a good overview of some of your biases, but I don't think it generalises to reality.
      - hnbad 2y ago
        You're aware that zingy one-liners only make for good conversation on the screen, not real life, right?
    - quonn 2y ago
      > MBA types too, although they tend to think the solution always comes down to treating everything as a market or something to be solved with a market mechanism
  - nickserv 2y ago
    Intelligent people are not any less likely to be delusional than anyone. They are however, much better at convincing themselves and others of their delusions. People that have logic training such as lawyers and engineers even more so.
    - goatlover 2y ago
      Michael Shermer's book Why Smart People Believe Weird Things.
- hennell 2y ago
  Probably because people on the internet like to hear opinions on things like psychological and sociological factors from people who have simply stated an expertise in semiconductors...
- bmitc 2y ago
  Institutionalization of engineers and physicists thinking they are smarter than others.
- rkachowski 2y ago
  overconfidence leads to participation which results in measurable statements and artefacts, under confidence does not. people are loud and (mostly) incorrect or silent.
  - bumby 2y ago
    But why would those "measurable statements and artefacts" lead one to believe they are competent? Presumably, wouldn't they also provide evidence of one's ignorance if they were evaluated objectively? (If it wasn't clear, I'm poking at the idea that we have numerous biases that prevent objective evaluation)
- lores 2y ago
  People on HN skew young, smart (in one domain), and tend to live in a bubble of similar people. If you know you're smart, the smart people you talk to validate your smartness (in one domain), society validates it some more by paying you massive amounts, and you're not experienced enough to know better, you're bound to overestimate your abilities and knowledge. It needn't be most, or even many on HN, and people of all kinds vastly overestimate their abilities. It's just that on HN it's overestimating with great ambition. (I say this very confidently, don't I?)
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    You sound like an expert in psychology.
    - lores 2y ago
      Eh, I'm nothing of the sort, I'm only advancing in years and have made it a point to exist in as many segments of society as I could. I was that cocky engineer once, my words are only anecdote from first-hand experience and observation. I never expect to be right, only hopefully more right than wrong.
      - gosub100 2y ago
        How would discourse change to eliminate this problem? Should we only speak about topics we are employed in? Lead each comment with a summary of our qualifications, or a proclamation of humility where we signal how little we know?
        ethbr1 2y ago
        I mean, hypothetically MS or Meta could already automatically do this...
        lores 2y ago
        I know you jest, but I think it wouldn't be a bad idea at all. There are languages whose grammar forces the speaker to explicitly clarify the source of information; Eastern Pomo, for example, has different verb forms for whether it's something you know first hand, saw, are repeating, or deducing. I imagine it's not only useful for the listener, it also helps the speaker realise if maybe they are building a shaky argument to make a point. I, for one, would be interested to see that system in English, it could lead to interesting developments.
- artistic_regard 2y ago
  [flagged]
- nyarlathotep_ 2y ago
  My (unpopular) take--programmers have been 'gassed up' by a decade of overcompensation + title inflation. People think the high pay and the fancy titles* they're (often) given reflects their value or intellect*, even subconsciously, and they behave in such a manner. *Sorry, I don't consider web programming (which comprises a majority of modern software development) "engineering" *Many are some of the most intelligent people quite literally on Earth, or are otherwise exceptional.
  - chasd00 2y ago
    heh yeah i think we're coming up now on two generations of our brightest minds being spent on making us more isolated from each other and clicking on ads.
drcongo 2y ago
I like coming here to remind myself how many things I know almost nothing about.
amtc80 2y ago
Being educated isn't really representative of Hacker News. There are very clear dynamics here where being more knowledgeable makes the discussions irrelevant. There are generally two ways of doing hard things. Either you are knowledgeable enough to be aware of the challenges and work around, or overcome, them. Or you are unaware, or shameless, enough to do it anyway. The later is much easier than the former. (Then you also have those who believe they could do something but never does because they can't). (Also not entirely mutually exclusive). Sometimes this is a feature of education, but most of the time it is just a feature of ignorance. Being educated doesn't also prevent you from being ignorant. It is very much expected that most willing to do something hard are smart enough to do it, but not smart enough to do it well. Unless it's been made easier, but then it is no longer as hard. It is also perception. Knowing both software and hardware would make you a technologist, or when talking about hardware someone who knows hardware but also knows software. Not knowing hardware but talking about it would more likely make you perceived as someone who knows software. And going back to the beginning, it is easier to think you know software than to actually know it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
computerthings 2y ago
Or just take this story, where people who haven't even punched a CEO are making up detailed "theories" about the actions and motivations of someone who shot one dead. https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto Read his manifesto, then read this whole thread again. It's hilarious.

smgit 2y ago

Go one step further. Why does that happen?

laidoffamazon 2y ago
Ivy Leaguers are trained, often from birth, that they are better than the rest of us plebs because of their “merit” and represent a superhuman caste. This guy was most likely the same way. If you’re told that you’re a superhuman, then why not think you can get away with it?
- hnbad 2y ago
  Oh, it's not just Ivy League although of course that usually comes with a background of privilege and prestige that further compounds on this tendency. STEM people in general heavily demonstrate this tendency. MBA types too, although they tend to think the solution always comes down to treating everything as a business or privatization.
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    This is a good overview of some of your biases, but I don't think it generalises to reality.
    - hnbad 2y ago
      You're aware that zingy one-liners only make for good conversation on the screen, not real life, right?
  - quonn 2y ago
    > MBA types too, although they tend to think the solution always comes down to treating everything as a market or something to be solved with a market mechanism
- nickserv 2y ago
  Intelligent people are not any less likely to be delusional than anyone. They are however, much better at convincing themselves and others of their delusions. People that have logic training such as lawyers and engineers even more so.
  - goatlover 2y ago
    Michael Shermer's book Why Smart People Believe Weird Things.
hennell 2y ago
Probably because people on the internet like to hear opinions on things like psychological and sociological factors from people who have simply stated an expertise in semiconductors...
bmitc 2y ago
Institutionalization of engineers and physicists thinking they are smarter than others.
rkachowski 2y ago
overconfidence leads to participation which results in measurable statements and artefacts, under confidence does not. people are loud and (mostly) incorrect or silent.
- bumby 2y ago
  But why would those "measurable statements and artefacts" lead one to believe they are competent? Presumably, wouldn't they also provide evidence of one's ignorance if they were evaluated objectively? (If it wasn't clear, I'm poking at the idea that we have numerous biases that prevent objective evaluation)
lores 2y ago
People on HN skew young, smart (in one domain), and tend to live in a bubble of similar people. If you know you're smart, the smart people you talk to validate your smartness (in one domain), society validates it some more by paying you massive amounts, and you're not experienced enough to know better, you're bound to overestimate your abilities and knowledge. It needn't be most, or even many on HN, and people of all kinds vastly overestimate their abilities. It's just that on HN it's overestimating with great ambition. (I say this very confidently, don't I?)
- ethbr1 2y ago
  You sound like an expert in psychology.
  - lores 2y ago
    Eh, I'm nothing of the sort, I'm only advancing in years and have made it a point to exist in as many segments of society as I could. I was that cocky engineer once, my words are only anecdote from first-hand experience and observation. I never expect to be right, only hopefully more right than wrong.
    - gosub100 2y ago
      How would discourse change to eliminate this problem? Should we only speak about topics we are employed in? Lead each comment with a summary of our qualifications, or a proclamation of humility where we signal how little we know?
      - ethbr1 2y ago
        I mean, hypothetically MS or Meta could already automatically do this...
      - lores 2y ago
        I know you jest, but I think it wouldn't be a bad idea at all. There are languages whose grammar forces the speaker to explicitly clarify the source of information; Eastern Pomo, for example, has different verb forms for whether it's something you know first hand, saw, are repeating, or deducing. I imagine it's not only useful for the listener, it also helps the speaker realise if maybe they are building a shaky argument to make a point. I, for one, would be interested to see that system in English, it could lead to interesting developments.
artistic_regard 2y ago
[flagged]
nyarlathotep_ 2y ago
My (unpopular) take--programmers have been 'gassed up' by a decade of overcompensation + title inflation. People think the high pay and the fancy titles* they're (often) given reflects their value or intellect*, even subconsciously, and they behave in such a manner. *Sorry, I don't consider web programming (which comprises a majority of modern software development) "engineering" *Many are some of the most intelligent people quite literally on Earth, or are otherwise exceptional.
- chasd00 2y ago
  heh yeah i think we're coming up now on two generations of our brightest minds being spent on making us more isolated from each other and clicking on ads.

drcongo 2y ago

I like coming here to remind myself how many things I know almost nothing about.

amtc80 2y ago

Being educated isn't really representative of Hacker News. There are very clear dynamics here where being more knowledgeable makes the discussions irrelevant. There are generally two ways of doing hard things. Either you are knowledgeable enough to be aware of the challenges and work around, or overcome, them. Or you are unaware, or shameless, enough to do it anyway. The later is much easier than the former. (Then you also have those who believe they could do something but never does because they can't). (Also not entirely mutually exclusive). Sometimes this is a feature of education, but most of the time it is just a feature of ignorance. Being educated doesn't also prevent you from being ignorant. It is very much expected that most willing to do something hard are smart enough to do it, but not smart enough to do it well. Unless it's been made easier, but then it is no longer as hard. It is also perception. Knowing both software and hardware would make you a technologist, or when talking about hardware someone who knows hardware but also knows software. Not knowing hardware but talking about it would more likely make you perceived as someone who knows software. And going back to the beginning, it is easier to think you know software than to actually know it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

computerthings 2y ago

Or just take this story, where people who haven't even punched a CEO are making up detailed "theories" about the actions and motivations of someone who shot one dead. https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/luigis-manifesto Read his manifesto, then read this whole thread again. It's hilarious.