This is of course true is some cases and less true in others.

I consider myself an expert in one tiny niche field (computer generated code), and when that field comes up (on HN and elsewhere) over the last 30 years the general mood (from people who don't do it) is that it's poor quality code.

Pre-AI this was demonstrably untrue, but meh, I don't need to convince you, so I accept your point of view, and continue doing my thing. Our company revenue is important to me, not the opinion of done guy on the internet.

(AI has freshened the conversation, and it is currently giving mixed results, which is to be expected since it is non-deterministic. But I've been doing deterministic generation for 35 years.)

So yeah. Lots of comments from people who don't fo something, and I'm really not interested in taking the time to "prove" them wrong.

But equally I think the general level of discussion in areas where I'm not an expert (but experienced) is high. And around a lot of topics experience can be highly different.

For example companies, employees and employers come in all sorts of ways. Some folk have been burned and see (all) management through a certain light. Whereas of course, some are good, some are bad.

Yes, most people still use voting as a measure of "I agree with this", rather than the quality of the discussion, but that's just people, and I'm not gonna die on that hill.

And yeah, I'm not above joining in on a topic I don't technically use or know much about. I'll happily say that the main use for crypto (as a currency) is for illegal activity. Or that crypto in general is a ponzi scheme. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it really is the future. But for now, it walks like a duck.

So I both agree, and disagree, with you. But I'm still happy to hang out here and get into (hopefully) illuminating discussions.