[VladTheImpalor]

You know what I'm against? This modern trend of newsletters. This is what _I_ would call Superficial and Simple(-Minded). These legions of me-too wannabes trying to get you to Subscribe to theirs so you can receive their "3 pithy one-liners that I graciously grace you with every day" in your inbox.

This "article" is under 500 words, and says nothing that hasn't been said a million times before. It's just a dude _not_ moving the conversation forward at all. "Hurr durr, low information density bad" is trite. I've known that for 20 years now. It's boring. It's short because the author has to write one of these every fortnight. No one has that many new ideas and things worth inflicting upon the world. The lad's a consultant, so this newsletter is just another self-aggrandizing tool te can boast about when he is charging speaking fees at sub-standard conferences of other such self-aggrandizers.

Seth Godin is the original perpetrator of this bullshit genre, and I wish that all of such one-bite quick-snack articles would burn to the ground. I seek something more intellectually rigorous.

[bbor]

I respect this comment for being very aggressive while still, AFAICT, being within the HN rules lol. I also came to the comments with a “wait, does this make any sense…?” attitude.

That said, I disagree with your decision to see this line of work as dishonest, despite the higher tempo meaning they’re a bit more rote. They’re popular because they’re easy to digest, and i think that’s an important role!

Consider what this article is: they’re just trying to critique a particular design and explain the principles behind it. Not everyone already knows every design principle.

…IMO

[TheOtherHobbes]

I'm going to agree with you, because while he points out the problem - hardly a new insight - he doesn't attempt a solution.

This would be a much more credible pitch for his consultancy with an "Oh that's clever" answer to the problem.