Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

None of Us Knows What We're Doing

feross.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 53 posts

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#11

Post by ericmoritz »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #5
goo wrote: post #4

I don't usually play the part of armchair psychologist, but this essay appears to me to be an excellent example of projection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_bias The author assumes that because he doesn't know what he's doing, other people also don't. I disagree. Sometimes people can know exactly what they're doing, and be fairly confident about the possible consequences. I made a viral hit similar to the a…

I agree with you completely, but I do think the biggest thing holding people back is fear, either that they won't do the right thing or they will fail. As I told my kids tonight, be do-ers, not spectators.

Everyone has their own internal FUD generator, we just need to acknowledge our own FUD and ignore it because we all can do amazing things if we don't let it control us.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#12

Post by Helianthus »

Well, yeah.

No one knows what they're doing. They only have the appearance by doing the sensible thing and doing the best they can.

The result is that in reality a lot of people know what they're doing; but they're still resting on that cardinal assumption:

whatever you're doing, it could fall to pieces. Even the most egotistical hacker, in his/her private moments, acknowledges the chaos of the universe.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#13

Post by aqrashik »

I agree with some of the points made, specifically that success is more about luck than anything else, but I flat out disagree on some other points.

Why would anyone advocate not listening to successful entrepreneurs, or even failed ones for that. While no one may completely know what they're doing, to simply say that everyone is winging it without any sense of direction is too extreme.

You can always learn from the successes or failures of others and having someone who's been there and done that to guide you can make a lot of decisions a lot simpler.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#14

Post by BasDirks »

jeromec wrote: post #7
goo wrote: post #4

I don't usually play the part of armchair psychologist, but this essay appears to me to be an excellent example of projection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projection_bias The author assumes that because he doesn't know what he's doing, other people also don't. I disagree. Sometimes people can know exactly what they're doing, and be fairly confident about the possible consequences. I made a viral hit similar to the a…

Yeah, according to the author I guess Einstein was "winging it" too.

Don't know why you were downvoted, it's a decent point you make. There are people who dedicated their entire life to an idea or ideal, and succeed _that_ way.

Perhaps it's useful to distinguish between "entrepreneurial" success-stories and achievements like Einstein's

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#15

Post by dvdhsu »

Johngibb wrote: post #8
hugh3 wrote: post #6

The grammar of this headline really bugs me. The author correctly remembers that "None of us" is singular, but then spoils it by throwing in the plural "we're". The correct version would, I think, be "None of us knows what he's doing", although both the feminists and the languagelog folks would complain about that.

How about "None of us knows what they're doing"? Hasn't it become generally accepted that 'they' can be used as a gender neutral singular pronoun?

"they're" refers to a party in third person, while it should refer to "us" which is in first person.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#16

Post by dvdhsu »

premchai21 wrote: post #10
hugh3 wrote: post #6

The grammar of this headline really bugs me. The author correctly remembers that "None of us" is singular, but then spoils it by throwing in the plural "we're". The correct version would, I think, be "None of us knows what he's doing", although both the feminists and the languagelog folks would complain about that.

Are you sure about “none” being singular in that context? I agree that the title is inconsistent, but I'd have written “None of us know what we're doing” (if I couldn't just pick some other phrasing). gcide defines “none” as “No one; not one; not anything; – frequently used also partitively, or as a plural, not any.” and also offers “None of their productions are extant. –Blair”, both purportedly from 1913 Webster. S…

Yep, "none" is not always singular. For example: "None of them are coming today" instead of "none of them is coming today". It is generally considered unidiomatic to use the latter.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#18

Post by nicpottier »

Is it just me or is this perhaps taking the story of YouTube Instant a bit far?

I mean ya, I guess it got some press and got him a job offer, but it's not like he invented cold fusion or something. It was a cute idea. Can we really draw any kind of real conclusions from it?

Seems like that type of success, of a cute meme taking off is actually rather common, it is the longer term, build a sustainable company, king of success that is much more difficult.

PS. Hate the font formatting, ugh.

Re: None of Us Knows What We're Doing

#19

Post by jacobolus »

hugh3 wrote: post #6

The grammar of this headline really bugs me. The author correctly remembers that "None of us" is singular, but then spoils it by throwing in the plural "we're". The correct version would, I think, be "None of us knows what he's doing", although both the feminists and the languagelog folks would complain about that.

From the New Oxford American Dictionary:

“USAGE It is sometimes held that none can take only a singular verb, never a plural verb: : none of them is coming tonight, rather than : none of them are coming tonight. There is little justification, historical or grammatical, for this view. None is descended from Old English nān, meaning ‘not one,’ and has been used for around a thousand years with both a singular and a plural verb, depending on the context and the emphasis needed.”

You’re right though that it’s weird to mix both singular and plural verbs for the same subject.

Post reply on HN