| |
| ▲ | ceejayoz a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Knowing how to stop a bad idea is a skill. Knowing when it's a bad idea is a skill. Knowing when you don't know is a skill. There's more than one skill in life. More than one may be applicable to a situation. Everyone on this forum has probably run into one of the "idea guys" who just need a tech cofounder to do the coding for 2% equity. | | |
| ▲ | kulahan a day ago | parent | next [-] | | He's pointing out that it's ironic to come into a thread about not shooting ideas and do nothing more than shoot down the idea. It's literally the exact behavior described in like the first paragraph of the article. It IS ironic. | | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | It’s only ironic if the headline is correct. Or are you ironically shooting down my idea that it is a skill? | | |
| ▲ | kulahan 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | No, irony does not depend on correctness. When the discussion is X, if your only input is -X, then it's ironic in the face of a discussion on shooting down ideas. |
|
| |
| ▲ | gnabgib a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I expect the comment was about your (pre-edit) "there doing" vs the current "they're doing", shame you didn't acknowledge your mistake in the change. | | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz a day ago | parent [-] | | At no point did my comment say "there doing". | | |
| ▲ | gnabgib a day ago | parent [-] | | Great, so what did your comment say the first time? | | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz a day ago | parent [-] | | "Yes, it is." (I'm also not clear on what would make a typo ironic in this case.) | | |
| ▲ | xrd a day ago | parent [-] | | "Shooting down ideas is not a skill"
"This doesn't mean they know what they're doing. Their thoughts can be bad."
| | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz a day ago | parent [-] | | Can you clarify? The alleged typo is… not there? Or their? Or they’re? What’s ironic here? | | |
| ▲ | xrd a day ago | parent [-] | | Ok, I just thought it was ironic that the article was about how being critical of something isn't skillful. And, it appeared to me (but all my downvotes prove I'm in the minority), that you just added a critical comment without doing anything else the author wrote about. For the record, I was curious about what else you have written, so I read some of your posts and comments. And, you seem to be a very thoughtful and intelligent person. I'm sorry if my comment was offensive, I meant it to be funny. | | |
| ▲ | hn_go_brrrrr a day ago | parent [-] | | It felt very low effort and did not contribute anything to the comment thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Aeglaecia a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | i dont agree with the self-indemnifying approach. let us apply this concept to itself - what could go wrong with not shooting down ideas? a lot of time could be wasted giving credence to that which is invalid. for example, ive just donated my energy debating the merits of an article that was probably written by a large language model (this is a judgement based on overt presence of negative parallelism, punchy prose, tripartite sentence structure, AI generated image, ...) - on a personal basis id prefer to have spent my time otherwise, as this entire argument can be summed as "be curious, not judgemental". therefore shooting this one down was probably a good idea? |
|
