> It would be a little bit like an extremely out-of-shape person criticizing a marathon running program as being too hard on someone's body, or a homeless person writing that active investing is better than Vanguard's low-fee indexing model. The person's context doesn't make their arguments right or wrong, it just lowers their authority and believability.

it absolutely would not, it would be more akin to someone wearing a fat-suite for a joke and criticizing someone for running with bad form

but you are taking this so seriously I can't quite tell if you're joking anyway

I think the "writing tons of interfaces" part is just a lack of a sufficiently advanced type system at disposal of the languages they used at the time. If you take Clean Code, for example, the constant plumbing around *old* java deficiencies (at least in the edition I read) would simply not exist in Typescript.

This ain't it; there's a debate to be had about the quality of evidence of the many different approaches to psychotherapy, but this person, this tone and this arguments are not it. You can watch people who know much more about the topic (which could be achieve by a more open-ended cursory search) here in the comments trying to elucidate points that are not even made by the OP, just out of the good faith of their hearts (and a desire to keep things on topic). But posting a self-fashioned race-realist certainly would repel most knowledgeable people with good faith.

I didn't expect to see DBM mentioned on hackernews today. That's the part where we bring up Jonny Craig?

We only speak of Jonny in hushed whispers for what once was.