I feel this article really needs a proper introduction. It starts "When I first rolled out this Apple-style frontend UI, it looked sleek, and I was genuinely excited." but it never explains what the UI was for. The first picture is of a basketball stats site but it end with "Medications for Menstrual Pain" which is captioned as "interative [?] background". What UI is this post actually talking about?

I am so bored of this kind of "design". It's just churn for the sake of ego.

Not sure what is it about reads like random text..

I wonder if this is a problem with the author or the design. I'm not a designer. But I often overthink when programming or writing, and it feels like someone's done the equivalent for design here.

I thought the first picture was pretty good: it seemed like a clean, functional design for a sports game type thing, albeit not hugely original

One way of describing it is "boring", another is "functional, familiar, easy to make sense of, intuitive".

The article reads like teams of people going through millions of tokens and weeks and weeks of manufactured suffering. Maybe it's the writing style, but the time and effort that's gone into "fixing a boring design" - IMO - seems completely disproportional to the scale of the problem, if there even really was one.

Maybe this is why I'm not a designer though.