Hacker News Reader

Intentionally ambiguous: the phrasing is specifically meant to suggest that it’s assumed non-universal and might not apply to all circumstances. If you embrace that ambiguity it’s a good antidote to the “considered harmful” problem and may well be less annoying.

View on HN

- "Bad smell" immediately invokes disgusting sensory experiences. It's intended to be ambiguous but it's not used this way.

- "Anti-pattern" is also ambiguous, because patterns have some bad uses, and anti-patterns have some good uses.

- And "Considered harmful" is also ambiguous. To consider something harmful is not the same as it being harmful, you're just considering it.

These phrases are used automatically and intend to sound authoritative about something being bad, period, despite their historical nuance and ambiguity. And frankly they're all disgusting and annoying at this point.

They show the author is more into clichés and clickbait, than substance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com