Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

> How do you tell the difference between someone who is legitimately experienced and someone who's skill is putting on appearances?

Those who have legitimate experience can detect their peers. Unfortunately, this is highly contextual. You can be a competent Ruby on Rails guy, but still suffer from Dunning-Krueger when trying to evaluate an iOS developer.

You can also go back to first principles. Do people live their lives and engage in conversations in a way that indicates they understand the epistemological stance of scientists? I have a super power in this regard. I exude a field that makes undesirable people prejudge me, to the point where they make factual mistakes.




This applies to business and marketing too.

A big problem is that innovators lacking business experience are easy prey for self-promoting douchenozzles who pretend to be able to "accelerate" them. In reality they don't know what they're doing, don't have the connections they claim to have, and just want to entangle themselves with something in the off chance it might turn out to be big.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: