> I think "trust, but verify" (as mentioned in the article) is a much more useful motto than "never trust anyone". The latter isn't an useful attitude, if you took it seriously you would have carefully check or rewrite everything from the ground up.
Not actually. You're describing an abstraction: your opinion/perception of what must/can be done.
It is possible to be comfortable with uncertainty and the unknown (everyone already is, but only in certain, intuitive (in large part due to cultural conditioning, which comes in a variety of forms) ways), it's mainly just counter-culture and counter-intuitive, thus needs strategies, and practice(!) (plus some non-trivial multi-level, multi-dimensional recursion....this is what us HN folks are good at, and love though, right? Right?[1]). We've all been through the hard work at least once, in a certain (mostly) shared way. There are other ways though.
> "Trust, but verify" is much more practical
How do you verify your verification in complex scenarios though? I bet I know: trust/contentment (in your verification skills), though this layer typically is not revealed to us, so causes no psychological unrest ("all is well"), because it does not exist.
> Don't be paranoid.
What do you think your reaction would be if you discovered this is not just wrong, but backwards?
[1] Alternatively: maybe we are only good at it, and only love it, sometimes? But then, "we" is a complex and deep set, into which we have little insight, but also plenty of hallucinated "insight".
Not actually. You're describing an abstraction: your opinion/perception of what must/can be done.
It is possible to be comfortable with uncertainty and the unknown (everyone already is, but only in certain, intuitive (in large part due to cultural conditioning, which comes in a variety of forms) ways), it's mainly just counter-culture and counter-intuitive, thus needs strategies, and practice(!) (plus some non-trivial multi-level, multi-dimensional recursion....this is what us HN folks are good at, and love though, right? Right?[1]). We've all been through the hard work at least once, in a certain (mostly) shared way. There are other ways though.
> "Trust, but verify" is much more practical
How do you verify your verification in complex scenarios though? I bet I know: trust/contentment (in your verification skills), though this layer typically is not revealed to us, so causes no psychological unrest ("all is well"), because it does not exist.
> Don't be paranoid.
What do you think your reaction would be if you discovered this is not just wrong, but backwards?
[1] Alternatively: maybe we are only good at it, and only love it, sometimes? But then, "we" is a complex and deep set, into which we have little insight, but also plenty of hallucinated "insight".