Yes, the "with" is superfluous
I also like Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice what can be properly associated with incompetence. (read stupidity)"
100%. I use a variation of this pretty much every day. Has an interesting history too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
As much as I'm (more than) competent with current technologies, I'm with Amos Tversky:
> My colleagues, they study artificial intelligence; me, I study natural stupidity.
https://coevolving.com/blogs/index.php/archive/artificial-intelligence-natural-stupidity/
I have respect for Kahneman's & Tversky's work. Altho if I was being bitchy I would say that they study unnatural stupidity - as most of their work was based off artificial situations and lab experiments.
I also like Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice what can be properly associated with incompetence. (read stupidity)"
100%. I use a variation of this pretty much every day. Has an interesting history too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
As much as I'm (more than) competent with current technologies, I'm with Amos Tversky:
> My colleagues, they study artificial intelligence; me, I study natural stupidity.
https://coevolving.com/blogs/index.php/archive/artificial-intelligence-natural-stupidity/
I have respect for Kahneman's & Tversky's work. Altho if I was being bitchy I would say that they study unnatural stupidity - as most of their work was based off artificial situations and lab experiments.