← Back to context

Comment by wtallis

13 hours ago

Take a look at https://news.ycombinator.com/leaders

The user you're suspicious of is pretty well-known in this community.

13 comments

wtallis

Reply
godelski  12 hours ago

Someone's credibility cannot be determined by their point counts. Holy fuck is that not a way to evaluate someone in the slightest. Points don't matter.

Instead look at their profile...

Points != creds. Creds == creds.

Don't be fucking lazy and rely on points, especially when they link their identity.

  • wtallis  12 hours ago

    I wasn't at all saying that points = credibility. I was saying that points = not unknown. Enough people around here know who he is, and if he didn't have credibility on this topic he'd be getting down voted instead of voted to the top.

    • godelski  12 hours ago

      Is that meaningfully different? If you read malfist's point as "tptacek's point isn't valuable because it's from some random person on the internet" then the problem is "random person on the internet" = "unknown credentials". In group, out group, notoriety, points, whatever are not the issue.

      I'll put it this way, I don't give a shit about Robert Downy Jr's opinion on AI technology. His notoriety "means nothing to anybody". But instead, I sure do care about Hinton's (even if I disagree with him).

      malfist asked why they should care. You said points. You should have said "tptacek is known to do security work, see his profile". Done. Much more direct. Answers the actual question. Instead you pointed to points, which only makes him "not a stranger" at best but still doesn't answer the question. Intended or not "you should believe tptacek because he has a lot of points" is a reasonable interpretation of what you said.

      2 replies →

delusional  13 hours ago

How is this whole comment chain not a textbook case of "argument from authority"? I claim A, a guys says. Why would I trust you somebody else responds. Well he's pretty well known on the internet forum we're all on, the third guy says, adding nothing to the conversation.

  • fc417fc802  5 hours ago

    It is an argument of authority but that's not always a bad thing. I think it's a bit out of keeping with the supposed point of this site (ie intellectual inquiry) but when it comes to rapidly evolving technologies like this one it can still add value on the whole.

  • hiccup_socks  12 hours ago

    it is literally just "authority said so".

    and its ridiculous that someone's comment got flagged for not worshiping at the alter of tptacek. they weren't even particularly rude about it.

    i guarantee if i said what tptacek said, and someone replied with exactly what malfist said, they would not have been flagged. i probably would have been downvoted.

    why appeal to authority is totally cool as long as tptacek is the authority is way fucking beyond me. one of those HN quirks. HN people fucking love tptacek and take his word as gospel.