Genuinely, one of the worst think pieces I've seen this year. How does the author presume to know how to use something without being able to read it's interfac

Genuinely, one of the worst think pieces I've seen this year. How does the author presume to know how to use something without being able to read it's interface or related documentation? The very things that make something easy to use, like clearly naming things, also makes it easy to read. I would even argue that reading what the underlying code does is always good practice. Even if you think you know how something works, confirming it can avoid nasty bugs. Not to mention all the projects that are non-trivial and have enough complex behavior that reading the code is the best way to understand what it does; where there is no other way for it to be easy to use according to the author. There's also lots of other benefits, such writing code that is more consistent and more semantic with the underlying style. Just horrible, horrible advice.