Item — HN Reader

Even if one takes an amoral view of it, there is a risk that the people you were investing in will now waste time investigating a non-existent technology.

Or that they will incorrectly discount things that you say in the future. But then that's one of the reasons that lying is so often a bad strategy in the first place.

1 comments

I think they'd pretty quickly find out that Arthur Andersen is effectively a defunct entity. I suppose it is an "in joke" like the "thousands of case studies" part of his question.

You are correct that some time, though probably not too much, would be wasted in discovering the above. I do see your point.

I felt that was part of the author's point too; "lying is so often a bad strategy". Perhaps the common ground between our approaches to the article is that he should not be surprised that his bullshit question elicited a bullshit response.