This article annoys me. Here seems to be the general structure: * Generalize PG's statement until it is basically irrelevant to the point he was trying to make

This article annoys me. Here seems to be the general structure: * Generalize PG's statement until it is basically irrelevant to the point he was trying to make. * Fill in a whole article speculating about the generalized interpretation of PG's comments. * Say what PG actually meant in the end without showing any indication that the author actually understood what he was talking about. * Paste a badly edited "primer" trying to explain the argument because the author obviously doesn't get it.