2 ms·
Oh, Rachel Kroll. You mean that Rachel Kroll? The one I've never heard of? Anyway, https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority https://yourlogicalfa
by 300bps 13y ago
Oh, Rachel Kroll. You mean that Rachel Kroll? The one I've never heard of?
Anyway, https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority
I don't care who someone is because I evaluate individual statements on their own merits. In Rachel's own statement, she just learned "why this worked" "the last time it came up on HN". I got my first modem in 1985 (have you noticed my username?) and been in IT for longer than most HN users have been alive. But feel free to tell me how I don't have a right to discuss something because I'm correcting the Rachel Kroll.
- axaxs 13y agoAgreed. I read that statement with the same disregard. Unless she wrote the entirety of the ip stack specification, the argument is moot. Not one single person does or can know every piece of the technology puzzle. This amounts to calling me stupid for using gnome because Linus likes KDE, or more recently vice versa.
- jonpeda 13y agoThe Korn Shell Story isn't an appeal to an authority, it's a punchline: Not only are you mistaken, the arrogance in your mistake is humorous to onlookers. You can discuss whatever you like. What you can't do is make unsubtantiated claims about someone else's level of understanding, based on your inability to distinguish between what a specification says and what implementations do. There are 2^32 strings of the form [0123]{16}. (16 base-4 digits) Does that mean that they are all valid IPv4 address? Can I type http://1230123012301230 http://1230123012301230 into my browser and have it resolve? And by the way, given the choice between "A investigated the phenomenon in detail recently" and "B has been interacting with the phenomenon for years without consideration for how it works", A is a more trustworthy source.