Regurgitating others' opinions and making multiple unfounded assertive statements is key to demonstrating he has already mastered the software domain.
He talked to a bunch of experienced devs and summarised their opinions. And then he shared his own opinion on the matter.
Nothing wrong with that.
The context of that opinion is highly relevant and not qualified in the article or a bio.
His insta page listed in the bio however gives an insight into his experience.
So yes, I feel perfectly content to raise his lack of experience.
I'm fed up of noise posing as insight.
It creates an unfriendly culture if people are told they can't talk about their frustrations and challenges without having x years of experience first.
But some tools require expertise and a beginner might not get the entire picture yet. E.g, if someone with 1 year of physics experience claims Quantum Mechanics to be dumb, is that a valid opinion?
If it doesn't in fact do that for this person it's totally valid to mention that.
But I used VIM for a decade and Emacs for 6 months.
Is anyone going to take my opinion on Emacs seriously, knowing that these tools take time to master?
Maybe not, but you're welcome to publish an essay on what you think.
In certain situations they may be even more valid. But when it comes to software processes you really need to have lived and breathed them in order to mount a credible argument.
>It creates an unfriendly culture if people are told they can't talk about their frustrations and challenges without having x years of experience first.
Nobody is denying this person the right to talk about their frustrations.
bjornsing's comment is implicitly highly critical of them doing so.
Something like "I dont like TDD" or "I struggle with TDD; here are my thoughts" would at least ground us in our expectations.
What does this even mean? Their experiences are valid?