> but I understand that the first principal component of casual skepticism on HN is "must be a conflict of interest".
(But if you think Tom is random, look at his profile. First link, not second)
The user you're suspicious of is pretty well-known in this community.
Instead look at their profile...
Points != creds. Creds == creds.
Don't be fucking lazy and rely on points, especially when they link their identity.
I'll put it this way, I don't give a shit about Robert Downy Jr's opinion on AI technology. His notoriety "means nothing to anybody". But instead, I sure do care about Hinton's (even if I disagree with him).
malfist asked why they should care. You said points. You should have said "tptacek is known to do security work, see his profile". Done. Much more direct. Answers the actual question. Instead you pointed to points, which only makes him "not a stranger" at best but still doesn't answer the question. Intended or not "you should believe tptacek because he has a lot of points" is a reasonable interpretation of what you said.