there is a pattern starting to emerge here on hackernews of highly voted posts by people who present themselves as experts and thought leaders who shamelessly put their lack of understanding at display. it's frightening.
Amount of false bullshit doesn’t make qualitative difference.
Only difference to make is that people should not take something as truth just because it is written in a book or in a blog post or if person has a degree or not.
Most technical writing is actually at the start of the technical journey, there's more people there and its more interesting to talk about strategy and ideas when its not "messy" with internal details and trade offs you make.
I encourage folks at any technical level to write, and I encourage folks to check authors work with a critical eye no matter how long the source has been in the industry, no amount of experience can protect you from being wrong.
People think if someone wrote blog post with technical details and it got upvoted - somehow it has to be an expert.
i quote:
"I graduated top of my class with a BSc in Computer Science [...]. I have a strong background in software engineering and technical leadership"
Which is fine! It's really hard to be truly expert in both. There's a reason why "programmer" and "database administrator" used to be two different professions. I'd like to think that I'm better than your average developer at flogging RDBMSes, but most DBAs I've worked with can still run circles around me when it comes to information modeling and database & query optimization.
It's not getting worse, you're getting better.
HN has for a long time been where I go for whatever you call the tech equivalent of watching stoners think they're having a deep conversation.
Ergonomics matter.