[Pseudoscience-is-malarkey]

Don't confuse confidence with good. There are so many people out there that pride themselves in having enough confidence to challenge norms. People that believe in weird things like the moon not really being in space, that government officials are operating a pedophile ring and/or are reptilians in human avatars waiting for the right moment to start a revolution, or that there are flying penises, pride themselves in not "bah bahing like the rest of the sheep". These people get such a high kick of dopamine from their confidence, that there is no limit to what they'll challenge.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Don't confuse confidence with good. There are so many people out there that pride themselves in having enough confidence to challenge norms. People that believe in weird things like the moon not really being in space, that government officials are operating a pedophile ring and/or are reptilians in human avatars waiting for the right moment to start a revolution, or that there are flying penises, pride themselves in not "bah bahing like the rest of the sheep". These people get such a high kick of dopamine from their confidence, that there is no limit to what they'll challenge.

Words have their own distinct meaning. If you are confused, just look up their definitions from online sources.
Without confidence, people tend to be silent, and simply follow what is said by the authorities. Promoting the views of the authorities also need confidence. At least you are confident that you understand what they have said and not misrepresenting them.
Challenging the authorities needs more confidence, since it comes with even higher risks.

[alancalverd]

And never forget the Kruger-Dunning Principle. Ignorance breeds arrogance. 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

And never forget the Kruger-Dunning Principle. Ignorance breeds arrogance. 

That's why I opened my data to be discussed here. If my ideas survive scrutiny, then it's for their merits, not necessarily because of me personally. If they are truly universal, then sooner or later someone else will come up with the same conclusions.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Keeping false information widespread and unchallenged is not a sustainable strategy. It may bring short term benefits for someone, but it will cause inefficiency and ineffective efforts in achieving the universal terminal goal.

[alancalverd]

Some universal ideas are still bullshit. God, aether, flat earth, the brotherhood of Man..... Scientific knowledge is not a matter of consensus, and the acquisition of scientific knowledge frequently involves questioning the validity of a consensus. No other "knowledge" is worth having. 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Some universal ideas are still bullshit. God, aether, flat earth, the brotherhood of Man..... Scientific knowledge is not a matter of consensus, and the acquisition of scientific knowledge frequently involves questioning the validity of a consensus. No other "knowledge" is worth having. 

They are not as universal as you might think.
At the moment of its discovery, only one or a few person has a particular scientific knowledge. Only when it's communicated to wider audience, more people will know about it. And only when most people who are confident enough to express their opinions have accepted it, it becomes the mainstream.

[alancalverd]

Still doesn't make it right, though.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

And never forget the Kruger-Dunning Principle. Ignorance breeds arrogance. 

The Irony of the Dunning-Kruger Effect

Examining the irony of the well-loved Dunning-Kruger effect. For further resources, see below.

Sources:
* The original study: Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134.
* The mentioned 2013 study: Simons, D. J. (2013). Unskilled and optimistic: Overconfident predictions despite calibrated knowledge of relative skill. Psychon Bill Rev, 20, 601-607.
* The mentioned 2018 study: Sanchez, C., Dunning, D. (2018). Overconfidence Among Beginners: Is a Little Learning a Dangerous Thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(1), 10-28.
* More information by Dunning: Dunning, D. (2011). The Dunning-Kruger Effect: On Being Ignorant of One's Own Ignorance. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 247-296.

Pictures taken from unsplash.com.

Chapters:
00:00 Mount Stupid
01:32 The Real Dunning-Kruger Effect
04:56 The Irony

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You?d Be Surprised How Smart (Or Dumb) You Are | The Dunning-Kruger Effect

In this video, we explore the pervasive cognitive bias known as the Dunning-Kruger effect. What does this common phenomenon lead to, both individually and collectively? Can we overcome it? And if so, how?

0:00 Intro
1:28 Causes
2:44 Metacognition
5:02 Voices
8:48 Blinkist (sponsor)

[alancalverd]

I've quoted this elsewhere, but make no apology for repeating it. One of the many lifesaving aphorisms of the aviation industry:
After 100 hours, you know everything
After 1,000 hours, you know that you don't know everything
After 10,000 hours, you know that you can't know everything.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

After 10,000 hours, you know that you can't know everything.

That's because our brain capacity is limited.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Find the research gap with AI in ONE day: Groundbreaking new process

Timestamps:
00:00 - Intro
01:45 - What is a research gap?
05:15 - How do I find a research gap?
06:54 - SciSpace
09:51 - Suggestions for your research gap
15:20 - Leveraging the power of AI
17:31 - Book a free call

[alancalverd]

That's because our brain capacity is limited.

No, it's because the atmosphere is inherently chaotic and the performance of a real airplane is not entirely predictable.

[alancalverd]

Apropos research gaps:

There is an infinity of things we don't know, and probably as many holes in what we do know.

There are very few things whose knowledge would be worth having, or holes worth filling.

Research is the last thing you should do when faced with a problem, and almost never worth doing in the absence of a problem.

[Bored chemist]

Research is the last thing you should do when faced with a problem, and almost never worth doing in the absence of a problem.

No.
It's sometimes worth doing; I got paid to do it.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

That's because our brain capacity is limited.

No, it's because the atmosphere is inherently chaotic and the performance of a real airplane is not entirely predictable.

Why it takes 10,000 hours to know these facts? Why can't they be introduced at the beginning?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Apropos research gaps:

There is an infinity of things we don't know, and probably as many holes in what we do know.

There are very few things whose knowledge would be worth having, or holes worth filling.

Research is the last thing you should do when faced with a problem, and almost never worth doing in the absence of a problem.

Research doesn't have to be done formally. It doesn't have to give monetary gain either. Sometimes curiosity is enough for a motivation.

[alancalverd]

Why it takes 10,000 hours to know these facts? Why can't they be introduced at the beginning?

If you told every prospective student pilot that they would spend their entire career or hobby time solving differential and vector equations in their head whilst hurtling at ridiculous speeds through an invisible, unpredictable medium populated at random intervals by potentially lethal rain, hail, snow, fog, birds, smoke....in a tin can propelled by occasional explosions of volatile gases, directed by total strangers sitting in darkened rooms towards a runway that might be flooded, shrouded in mist, or mysteriously "closed", they wouldn't take their first flight. It's even more fun with a nervous passenger.

There's a heck of a difference between remembering an aphorism and having the humility to accept it.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Why it takes 10,000 hours to know these facts? Why can't they be introduced at the beginning?

If you told every prospective student pilot that they would spend their entire career or hobby time solving differential and vector equations in their head whilst hurtling at ridiculous speeds through an invisible, unpredictable medium populated at random intervals by potentially lethal rain, hail, snow, fog, birds, smoke....in a tin can propelled by occasional explosions of volatile gases, directed by total strangers sitting in darkened rooms towards a runway that might be flooded, shrouded in mist, or mysteriously "closed", they wouldn't take their first flight. It's even more fun with a nervous passenger.

There's a heck of a difference between remembering an aphorism and having the humility to accept it.

There's a difference between imperfect knowledge and the total lack of it.
Hiding critical and important information from those who are affected is not a good practice. Ask the victims of 737max.
A better solution is to inform the risk, in terms of probability and severity from currently best knowledge. Then let them decide for themselves if it's still worth it.