Someone afraid he's seeing commoditized the labor he sells by it, apparently. Past that I wouldn't really know, having only read the article. For example: > A

Someone afraid he's seeing commoditized the labor he sells by it, apparently. Past that I wouldn't really know, having only read the article. For example: > A web developer possesses applied expertise in the workings of the web[.] > If you’d like my definition, I guess that heading is the closest I care to get. Nitpick it as broad, if you like; that’s somewhat on purpose. So invited, I accept, only to immediately disappoint: the definition here isn't broad, nor indeed anything else, but facially incoherent. What does it even mean to "possess applied expertise?" Is that double verb meant to denote, as when taken literally it does, "knowing how to do the thing that inheres in knowing how to do something?" Or is this sudden explosion of semantic complexity a symptom of the author's lack of success in reconciling his own doubts to himself? Which seems to you more likely? edit: Then again, in the author's own colophons he describes himself variously as some combination of "frontend," "design[er]," and "engineer," though he is always very clear on his employer. Given he thus reveals a preference directly against describing himself by the term he defends, I now regard this article as likely sucker bait: why bother competing against people you can cozen into opting out on their own? And of course every fool loves to mistake a wall of punctilious typography for wisdom.