It opens with an image of two green bubbles, one higher contrast than the other. The higher contrast one is labeled "Good" and the lower contrast "Gross". Afte

It opens with an image of two green bubbles, one higher contrast than the other. The higher contrast one is labeled "Good" and the lower contrast "Gross". After a two sentence paragraph expressing how the green/blue technical differentiation has become a social one, it then asks the question "Why is green worse than blue?" The next line: "The answer is color contrast." What could they have realistically done to cut to the chase sooner in a meaningful way? The only real thing is ditching those two context building sentences. But it's two short sentences, providing relevant context. Doesn't really feel like a valid criticism IMO.