You don't get to be a good writer via ad hominem attacks either. Having had several interactions with the author, I'd say he has a knack for putting forth contr

You don't get to be a good writer via ad hominem attacks either. Having had several interactions with the author, I'd say he has a knack for putting forth controversial theses like the one in the article. I've disagreed with lots of them--but I've always gotten smarter thinking about why I've disagreed with them (and have often been left with the suspicion that he really might be right). When I was younger I used to read things I thought were wrong and smugly dismissed them as due to some flaw on the part of the author. Luckily I've outgrown that. (Good thing too, as I no longer do embarrassing things like asserting that a multi-decade veteran of the industry must be some novice.)