<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>wingspar</author><text>A pdf version
&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.cia.gov&amp;#x2F;library&amp;#x2F;center-for-the-study-of-intelligence&amp;#x2F;csi-publications&amp;#x2F;books-and-monographs&amp;#x2F;psychology-of-intelligence-analysis&amp;#x2F;PsychofIntelNew.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.cia.gov&amp;#x2F;library&amp;#x2F;center-for-the-study-of-intellig...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Thinking About Thinking (1999)</title><url>https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/psychology-of-intelligence-analysis/art4.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>chiefalchemist</author><text>&amp;gt; &amp;quot;The reaction of the Intelligence Community to many problems is to collect more information, even though analysts in many cases already have more information than they can digest. What analysts need is more truly useful information--mostly reliable HUMINT from knowledgeable insiders--to help them make good decisions. Or they need a more accurate mental model and better analytical tools to help them sort through, make sense of, and get the most out of the available ambiguous and conflicting information.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;I would think the key is the latter. That is, even if you get more data it does not become __useful__ information unless you&amp;#x27;re willing and able to process it.&lt;p&gt;That aside, it&amp;#x27;s difficult, if not impossible for us &amp;quot;on the outside&amp;quot; to judge the value of these concept to the IC as we only get to know what the IC wants us to know. They&amp;#x27;re playing the long game. They&amp;#x27;re playing chess. Maybe it&amp;#x27;s just me but when I hear a news story (or a friend &amp;#x2F; colleague) that says &amp;quot;The NSA said...&amp;quot; or the &amp;quot;CIA said...&amp;quot; I accept those as close to meaningless. The IC is, afterall, in the misinformation business.&lt;p&gt;p.s. I believe the proper term for tbinking about thinking is meta-cognition. I find it odd that the CIA would avoid using the proper term.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Thinking About Thinking (1999)</title><url>https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/psychology-of-intelligence-analysis/art4.html</url></story>