[krapp]

You can assume that for any subject other than CS, unless someone specifically mentions their credentials in the field, most commenters won't know what they're talking about. Hacker News has a reputation for "aggressive ignorance" outside of its wheelhouse.

Remember, HN isn't exactly checking anyone's CV at the door. All it takes to post here is knowing how to fill out a web form. The culture here tends to believe the simplistic design somehow draws deep technical intellects like moths to a flame but it really doesn't.

[bunabhucan]

I get that, what's hard is if my made up chip designer is commenting about UI coding or networking topology or something closer to HNs heart.

[krapp]

Yeah, the technical content on HN is kind of a crapshoot too, unfortunately. Just slightly less so than everything else.

I guess it's better to view HN as entertainment than expertise overall.

[vacuity]

That's why I like to read most of the comments on a post, because typically I'll find some useful information scattered throughout. After I'm done, I can roughly get a sense for "excellent comments", "comments that probably have a good point", "medium-quality arguing", and "probably just wrong comments". Then I may seek out other submissions of the same topics to get more data. Over time, I refine which points I think are probably valid. HN has its gems, just perhaps not as often or obvious as advertised.