[igniteflow]

If you buy into personality types, the hacker philosophy in part comes from the fact many "hackers" are of ISTP type or similar. These personality types learn by taking things apart and are far more likely to simply ignore rules if they can see a way to solve a problem. As tech expands and becomes comprised of a broader range of people with different takes on how things should be done, then there is room for conflict and it's valid to question how we will overcome this. However, replacing statements with questions feels like a philosophy class. If the author has an effective counter argument then they should be able to define it clearly and succinctly.

[GavinMcG]

Is "you should be asking these questions instead of making those assumptions" such an unclear argument?

The questions are the whole point – that's what the speaker wants us to keep in mind as we make choices as professionals.