He has a point, though the way he said it might be a little too grand. Sometimes I feel that I'd like to learn some topic X for school, in enough depth that I can solve problems that appear on exams, while at other times, I wish I could learn X just enough to be dangerous. For this reason I sometimes wish there is one of resource for each of those situations, or as the previous poster called them "constraints". But then I realize that as you divide them up like this, they just don't get popular enough for the author to put in enough work or maintain quality.

Luckily, for the most part, the MOOC scene brings us one type and the other type exists a lot on youtube etc.

I hope I didn't sound too much like the previous poster, but when I read what he said, I realized that I too had the same thought process!

Sorry if I sounded grand there, that wasn't the intention though. I sincerely think, what I wrote reflects some part of the reality about these things called "learn x in y minutes". I may not doubt their intentions and even grant that some of them have very good intentions. But what worries me is the negative attitude about learning such titles (and some such tutorials/articles) end up promoting.

No doubt, the internet has made many things easier to learn. Myself has been very much a beneficiary of the internet.

Take Erlang [1] from that site for example: The site doesn't say anything about how many minutes should I spend to learn Erlang. How many minutes does the author(s) thinks one should spend to learn Erlang? Not mentioned. Even at best such things can be misleading to many newcomers.

[1] https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/erlang/

eh, I sorta share the sentiment. I really like the format of "Learn X in Y minutes" but I'd love if Y could be anywhere from 5 minutes to one month.

but yeah, big words.