[OldManAndTheCpp]

Expertise isn't a cure all. An example is the famous Minux/Linux fight. Tanenbaum was a distinguished professor, arguing with some guy on the internet who built a kernel. "Is a monokernel a viable way to build a first rate operating system?" Fact Check: operating system researchers widely believe that monolithic kernels are a fundamentally flawed way to build a system...

The premise that there are some specially endowed people who, by virtue of their credentials, are the only ones able to mark things as true sounds like the core tenants of a religion, not a secular society!

[dqpb]

Well, I wasn't saying that there should be specially endowed people, I was asking about the reverse: how can someone who is not informed fact-check someone who is?

Or to make it less personal, how can someone fact-check information they aren't knowledgeable about?

[pcwalton]

Tanenbaum was in fact right. Monolithic kernel design has caused no end of problems, which is why modern OS's (including Linux!) are moving a lot into userspace. See Windows moving font parsing out of the kernel, macOS DriverKit, Linux uio, etc.

[DarylZero]

You spelled Minix wrong and told the story wrong.

Not the best way to make an argument against fact-checking.

[OldManAndTheCpp]

> While I could go into a long story here about the relative merits of the two designs, suffice it to say that among the people who actually design operating systems, the debate is essentially over. Microkernels have won.

https://groups.google.com/g/comp.os.minix/c/wlhw16QWltI

I will concede that I spelled 'minix' wrong.

[DarylZero]

> operating system researchers widely believe

Tanenbaum did SAY that, but that is different from it being true.

Fact-checking doesn't mean just accepting the declaration of the more credentialed party in a debate that their view is expert consensus.