1. "That's a pretty bad default." (it would be, after all.)
2. "That scenario is quite contrived."
The former is just a misunderstanding, but I think the reason why it happened is simple: the article is written in a way that doesn't really make it clear whether it is a condition they added or a condition they observed. On the other hand, giving someone the benefit of the doubt, I personally assumed that it was unlikely someone would intentionally add this, since it's, well, you know... Quite contrived.
I think I understand the purpose now (it's intentionally contrived, merely for practice with probably a less contrived setup in the future) and I hate to be overly harsh on the article, since it's perfectly fine for someone's personal blog, but when I see something on HN's frontpage, I generally have some expectation for how interesting it is. After all, plenty of genuinely very interesting things die in new, why would this make it out? Alas, sometimes it just happens.