Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
"This may be bollocks, but it's lovely bollocks."

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                           

Tindale's Law of Godwin's Law Applied To Moore's Law

  (+4)
(+4)
  [vote for,
against]

I propose that it is a truism that all internet conversations …well, some …well, a few internet conversations will always …well, sometimes …well, occasionally devolve into someone saying that Moore's Law is not true any more.
Ian Tindale, Apr 05 2017

https://en.wikipedi...%80%93Kruger_effect [hippo, Apr 05 2017]

Debt collectors http://www.collectmoore.com
Not patent lawyers. [popbottle, Apr 05 2017]

Otherhalfbakery The_20Other-Half_20Bakery
Thought it sounded familiar [nineteenthly, Apr 06 2017]

[link]






       If economic inflation got bad enough it would cancel out Moore's Law in financial terms, so if there's a way of linking comparisons to Hitler with hyperinflation, Godwin's and Moore's Laws would antagonise each other.   

       Can we get Rule 34 in here too somehow?
nineteenthly, Apr 05 2017
  

       And Parkinson's Law? (work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion)
And Hippo's Law? (any internet debate between two people on a subject where they have opposing strongly-held views will result in these views being strengthened rather than weakened)
hippo, Apr 05 2017
  

       What about the Peter Principle?
nineteenthly, Apr 05 2017
  

       And my favourite, the Dunning–Kruger effect (see link)
hippo, Apr 05 2017
  

       Maybe someone who knows nothing about the Dunning- Kruger Effect should have a go at coming up with this law. I'm sure they'd find it easy.
nineteenthly, Apr 05 2017
  

       I take serious issue with the Dunning Kruger thing. For one, it isn't really much of a statement about people overestimating their ability. It was inspired by a case featuring an idiot. This isn't really related to ability, although often the two situations accompany each other. I also think that it is a particularly weak point in a few other aspects. Firstly, that estimation of ability and expression of ability rarely track at all. So what? The reasons why are highly diverse, and I would suspect mostly to do with other people, not the person under study. I also would suggest that there's a more complex non-linear temporal aspect that is being ignored in the methodology.   

       For example, if someone is learning to do a thing, or study a topic*, they must estimate that their ability and (a separate thing) their understanding to be incomplete - a beginner - a newbie or neophyte. But - and it's a wide but - they shouldn't simply assume they know nothing, or they won't progress at all. It'd be the same as assessing their competence in a totally irrelevant unrelated topic they have no interest in or no inclination to look into. Why would you go forward and learn anything about it other than as a piece of trivia? A person needs to feel that they might have something about them that makes them somewhat good at it (even if it is .1%), or you wouldn't even sign up for it in the first place. As learning or experience or practice progresses, I think it is of value to overestimate the ability to avoid being disheartened. This should continue throughout a big majority of the learning journey. It is only when you get to a stage where you are quite confident in a topic that you realise how shit you actually are and how little you really know compared to what there is to know out there. If people had a linear 1:1 relationship of their progress vs reality, they'd give up - and keep on giving up.   

       The time aspect is complex, not just a case of 'fake it till you make it', but this leapfrogging of pretending vs understanding is certainly one part of it.   

       Another aspect is how you interact with others out there. For a very long time when I was learning programming, I was the only one I knew that had the slightest understanding of how a microprocessor worked and what an instruction set is. I thought I was fairly okay at it, I knew I was not 'there' yet, because it was so difficult and there was a lot I didn't understand. It wasn't until much later that I realised that there were people around that were much faster than I was at implementing a solution - they could do things in an afternoon that had taken me three years. And theirs worked! But, in comparison with those around me, family, friends, everyone at art college, I was really up there at the top. So, other people dramatically change an internal assessment of competence. (In retrospect, if I knew I was so inefficient, I should have stopped trying to program altogether much sooner (or eradicated all those who were better) (whichever is easier)).   

       But the static study of assessment of competence only takes into account a snapshot of time and not an evaluation of any kind of journey, if indeed there is one - it makes a significant difference if there is.   

       *(other chocolate bars are available).
Ian Tindale, Apr 05 2017
  

       How about the "Halfbakery Law of Egocentricity", which states that any thread on the halfbakery will eventually become a discussion revolving around Ian Tindale ?
8th of 7, Apr 05 2017
  

       Works for me, but I'd suggest renaming it slightly - take out the 'halfbakery' bit and instead put in 'Ian Tindale'.
Ian Tindale, Apr 05 2017
  

       Many people must have had the experience that at the start of learning about a particular subject area they wonder what there can possibly be to know about such an apparently simple and straightforward topic, and then have learnt and come to realise that there's a lot more to it than they thought.   

       On the other hand, I really feel a completely ignorant chess player could so befuddle a grandmaster by their baffling incompetence that the former could lead the latter to concede the game. There's also overthinking and getting bogged down in details, and also the possibly non-existent phenomenon of an intoxicated individual passing through a charmed period where they unwittingly place themselves in danger and survive. I remember once when I was drunk, I was better at snooker than I had been sober, and I was demonstrably more fluent in German when I've been drunk. So, I don't know.   

       Also, there are specialisms, and I'm just wondering if those specialisms would repeat any Dunning-Kruger Effect that might exist, and if so, how about every stage of learning repeating Dunning-Kruger, in which case where is it and how would it operate? So, for example you're a nurse, say, and the medicine (which isn't to imply that nurses are merely second-class doctors) you learn seems simple, then you do a degree in medicine and realise there's more to it, then you become a brain surgeon, and then you specialise in a particular kind of brain surgery - I don't know what that would be because of Dunning- Kruger. But, at each stage, do you go through a cycle of expecting it to be simpler than it turns out to be? Do you end up learning that it isn't?   

       I also feel partly responsible for making this idea veer rapidly off-topic, for which I apologise.
nineteenthly, Apr 05 2017
  

       //making this idea veer rapidly off-topic// - I wouldn't say that it veered *rapidly* off-topic. To me, the progress towards something unrelated seemed fairly steady and nicely-paced. If there was a universally-agreed measure of topic-adherence it would be possible to construct metrics to show this visually alongside the annotation stream.
hippo, Apr 05 2017
  

       I'd estimate that it is supposed to be exponential, and not linear. The veering off topic would never be linear or nobody would notice. If it isn't exponential, or anti- logarithmic, it is probably tangential.
Ian Tindale, Apr 05 2017
  

       Several times I've thought about posting an idea about a function which returns the value of off-topic tangent for annotations on here but I've never managed to express it clearly enough. I suppose what you could do is...
nineteenthly, Apr 05 2017
  

       Fully support renaming the halfbakery Ian Tindale and for the sake of consistency renaming [half] [Ian] and [quarterbaker] [quartertindale] and so on and so forth and any objection as to utility or common sensnosity of an idea is met with "B-b-but this is the I a n T i n d a l e"
calum, Apr 05 2017
  

       I think also that it as also in every sense a worthwhile use of the Ian Tindale to attempt to syncrete a single universal law by which all of life o all messageboard conversations (whichever is more important) can be governed and therefore also predicted. The Ur text of internet blather. We can make it here and render the rest of the web obsolete.
calum, Apr 05 2017
  

       Is there a condition known as The Trump-Dunning-Kruger effect? This is where you dye your head orange in the confused belief that lemons make you invisible to fake news cameras, only you are also too thick to know the difference between an orange and a lemon?
xenzag, Apr 05 2017
  

       How come there's never been a HB schism, with over-gruntled party starting 'The Real Halfbakery', for all right-thing people?
not_morrison_rm, Apr 05 2017
  

       There are two bakeries! Are you only in one of them?
xenzag, Apr 06 2017
  

       Presumably there's an Otherhalfbakery, which comprises a forum for people whose partners discuss their partners' addiction to an ideas bank.   

       [Ian] could always change his name to Half Bakery.
nineteenthly, Apr 06 2017
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle