And wrote this title

This is a truly poor article that says much but contains little in terms of original and interesting thinking. I regret having read it.

anyone else annoyed that these buzzwords are all hashtagged and cross linked to other blog articles, rather than defined? #OMN, #4norms, #dotcons - you can’t just make up a bunch of terms and then use them without explaining them to your audience. Wikipedia handles this nearly flawlessly by always offering a definition on the first usage.

Hashtag #mainstreaming? Hashtag #stupidindividualism?? I feel like this is just adding friction to the experience of reading this person’s content - if they feel that have something important to say, why choose this manner of presentation?

I keep hearing that "the web is broken". But how exactly? What parts are broken in a way that makes it worse than it used to be at some point? I think people who write this just glorify the past. I don't want to go back. Not to the age of Flash ads that crashed the browser. Not to the age where people overused HTML frames and basic stuff like opening in a new window didn't work. Not to the age when every site used tables for layout, and they didn't work half of the time. Not to the time when every non-trivial application required Java and the whole computer froze even if you were one of the lucky ones who got it working. Not to IE-specific hacks and ActiveX. Not to image maps...

And content-wise, there is more content than at any point in time. So what's the issue?