Interesting take, but I think it goes out of its way to prove the definition of low-level to be wrong, while missing that the definition it gives and claim is w

Interesting take, but I think it goes out of its way to prove the definition of low-level to be wrong, while missing that the definition it gives and claim is wrong, in itself is very flexible. What is irrelevant? To a data-scientist, typescript is low-level. You're required to think about structure and compile stuff! To a web developer, C# and Java are low-level because you need to think about the execution platform To an IT developer, C and C++ are low level because you need to think about memory. To a game developer assembly is low level because you need to think about everything. To electronocians everything is high level. To accountants VBA in Excel is low level. To a product manager a word document with any sort of technical words is too low level. If you need to optimize your software to the point where some CPU specific instructions are required, C is too high level because its hiding stuff that is not irrelevant.