The thing about not knowing what you don’t know
In the 1990s, psychologists Justin Kruger and David Dunning identified something anyone who has worked in a team will recognise: beginners tend to overestimate how good they are, while genuine experts tend to underestimate themselves. The reason is simple. To judge your own ability accurately, you need enough knowledge to understand what good actually looks like. Without it, you can’t see the gap.
This matters in any setting where decisions have real consequences. Being skilled in one area offers no protection in another; expertise doesn’t transfer. Right now, a wave of self-styled “vibe coders” and AI specialists are building and deploying digital products with little grounding in software engineering, security or data privacy. The tools are impressive, and the speed at which someone can produce something that looks finished is real. But looking finished and being safe are not the same thing. Without the background to recognise what could go wrong, you can’t see what you’ve left exposed: unprotected data, insecure integrations, systems that work until they don’t.
The most common mistake is using this effect to explain other people’s overconfidence. The more useful habit is to turn it on yourself. Stay curious, seek regular feedback and approach new areas with genuine humility.
