4 ms·

This sounds very similar to PG's recent essay, though they're coming at it from slightly different directions. I like his point about the big concepts of conte

This sounds very similar to PG's recent essay, though they're coming at it from slightly different directions. I like his point about the big concepts of contentious topics being reasonably simple. His comparison to physics is a great example of this. People are only likely to make a topic part of their identity if they think they have a reasonable understanding of it. Macroeconomics is a bit more scientific than politics and religion and seems to fit nicely in the sweet spot of simple-enough topics that are also complex enough to appeal to the above average intelligence of the geek community. Maybe macroeconomics is the geek's politics.

snitko 18y ago
Actually, that was my first thought, that it's very similar to what PG has recently written. But then I thought that this case is different and the author has made wrong assumptions. I don't think geeks made economics part of their identity. I think sometimes it's not enough for geeks to be geeky in their own field and they want to demonstrate their ability to analyze and become experts in things that lie behind computer fields, while not realizing this might not be just as easy for them as learning another language.
- mightybyte 18y ago
  I completely agree with you here. There are certainly geeks (and HN seems to have a higher concentration of them) who haven't fallen into the trap of making a macroeconomic belief part of their identity. But there are plenty who have. This guy appears to be ranting at all of them, with the questionable implied assumption that you can't have useful things to say on complex topics without some kind of advanced degree.
  - ellyagg 18y ago
    Why do people keep saying that? He didn't suggest any implied assumption like that at all. And, no, if you don't understand the system, then you can have very little of value to say on it. Just precisely like if I don't understand quantum mechanics, it would be extremely stupid of me to make passionate forum posts about it.

snitko 18y ago

Actually, that was my first thought, that it's very similar to what PG has recently written. But then I thought that this case is different and the author has made wrong assumptions. I don't think geeks made economics part of their identity. I think sometimes it's not enough for geeks to be geeky in their own field and they want to demonstrate their ability to analyze and become experts in things that lie behind computer fields, while not realizing this might not be just as easy for them as learning another language.

mightybyte 18y ago
I completely agree with you here. There are certainly geeks (and HN seems to have a higher concentration of them) who haven't fallen into the trap of making a macroeconomic belief part of their identity. But there are plenty who have. This guy appears to be ranting at all of them, with the questionable implied assumption that you can't have useful things to say on complex topics without some kind of advanced degree.
- ellyagg 18y ago
  Why do people keep saying that? He didn't suggest any implied assumption like that at all. And, no, if you don't understand the system, then you can have very little of value to say on it. Just precisely like if I don't understand quantum mechanics, it would be extremely stupid of me to make passionate forum posts about it.