[jacobr1]

A better title would be something like: "Most advice sucks: how to determine when it doesn't"

The important point I got out of the article, wasn't that most advice is bad, which seems clearly true, but a theory as to why:

1) Not novel - it just repeats what everyone already know, but maybe with a new anecdote! 2) Not actionable - the advice to vague to be practicable, good advice needs to be more specific which probably mean not applicable to everyone, which means not oprah scale. 3) Not based on evidence - why does this advice work, as opposed to being survivorship bias or junk extrapolation of real research.