[tekla]

I will respond with your low quality response with another low quality response.

> You think years of training, education and experience don't occur outside fancy journals?

Literally nothing I said was about this.

> You believe it's not "science" if it's not published in Nature? Wow.

Also literally nothing I said was about this.

We have a fun little situation where HN people, most of which barely know anything about superconductivity, or physics, or really anything outside of their webdev bubble, think that their random opinions on random news articles means anything. A 10 minute read of Wikipedia is now considered expertise. Obviously the random news article with low quality information is proof that room temp superconductivity is a real thing.

It's the exact same feeling I have when I read HN talking about aviation, which I have a strong background in. It's pretty clear most HN people have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

[gitfan86]

The trick is to get good at identifying the people that are correct and ignoring the people that don't know what they are saying.

It is hard, but once you can do that it is superior to listening to the experts only. The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power. So while they may be experienced and smart their intentions may not be pure.

[wolverine876]

> The trick is to get good at identifying the people that are correct and ignoring the people that don't know what they are saying.

You need expertise yourself in order to do that. Otherwise you are easily misled.

> The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power. So while they may be experienced and smart their intentions may not be pure.

Where do you get any information then? How do you get through your day?

People can have various motives and still provide accurate information. The motives don't completely dominate them, they have other motives, and we can read critically.

But if they lack expertise, they can't provide accurate information.

[kibwen]

> The problem with people who are recognized as experts is that they have a high likelihood of wanting status and power.

In order for this to have any useful predictive power, you have to also demonstrate that "the people who are correct" don't want status and power, and also that the set of people who are correct doesn't overlap with the set of experts.

[baobabKoodaa]

> > You think years of training, education and experience don't occur outside fancy journals?

> Literally nothing I said was about this.

Yes you did. Here is a copy of the comment you responded to:

""I wanna smoke what the gatekeepers are smoking. “No, you don’t understand science! It can come only from fancy journals. You cannot test the properties yourself!”. Meanwhile Varda goes brrr.""

You responded to that comment with:

""Yes, years of training, education, and experience is now "gatekeeping"""

The implication of your comment was that it's not gatekeeping to say that science can only come from fancy journals, because it takes years of training, education and experience to get to those fancy journals - and those years of bla bla are somehow an exclusive property of being in a fancy journal.

> We have a fun little situation where HN people, most of which barely know anything about superconductivity, or physics, or really anything outside of their webdev bubble, think that their random opinions on random news articles means anything. A 10 minute read of Wikipedia is now considered expertise. Obviously the random news article with low quality information is proof that room temp superconductivity is a real thing.

This was directed at me, as if I had presented myself as some kind of expert on superconductivity, or implied that I have some kind of valuable opinions on superconductivity. Where did I write anything that could be inferred in that direction? Nowhere! I disparaged your journal-worshipping, predatory-business-supporting, anti-science attitude. That's all. I didn't provide any opinions on superconductivity.