I'd go so far as to allow the quoted to be referring more generally to tech workers in general, including many that do not function in the abstract. With regar

I'd go so far as to allow the quoted to be referring more generally to tech workers in general, including many that do not function in the abstract. With regard to "tolerance for ambiguity," perhaps there's a point to be made. I know I have a low tolerance for ambiguity, but I work with male co-workers (cough sales weasels cough) that are just as ambiguous about things as anyone else could ever be. However, I think you've illuminated a point that I hadn't considered: that the speaker meant something other than what was said; that this self-described intelligent individual may have not been clear; or didn't understand how their words would be misinterpreted; or is oblivious to their own misuse of language. And this is usually the cause for so much animosity and/or ambivalence: that the speaker/writer can't be bothered to clarify their intent; that they throw up their hands and declare "you wouldn't understand!" rather than explain themselves; and further that their audience is all-to-eager to castigate them for being stubborn, abusive, obtuse, etc.