4 ms·
Exactly. I notice this pattern of thinking quite often on HN: X has some flaw (according to shoddy armchair analysis and vague anecdotes), so X is terrible. I
by asdfologist 13y ago
Exactly. I notice this pattern of thinking quite often on HN: X has some flaw (according to shoddy armchair analysis and vague anecdotes), so X is terrible. If you want to argue that X is bad, you should at least discuss an alternative Y and make a convincing argument as to why Y is better than X. There are pros and cons to everything.
- spamizbad 13y ago> Exactly. I notice this pattern of thinking quite often on HN: X has some flaw (according to shoddy armchair analysis and vague anecdotes), so X is terrible. Harvard Business School has studied employee performance evaluations and has found them to be flawed: http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=44969 http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=44969