Interesting breakdown. But this format is horrible for conveying information. An improvement would be removing the slides, crafting some coherent paragraphs and then reinserting some of the more crucial images for support.
1. Mention that they gave a talk
2. Post a video recording online
3. Post the slides online, as-is (PDF or whatever) with no explanation
4. Lay out the slides on a HTML page, with accompanying text (what would have been said by the speaker), so that it's easier to read — while still being clear you're “reading” a talk.
5. Redo/rewrite the whole thing into text form, paragraphs and all.
The author here has done 1 to 4, and you're complaining they've not also done 5, but that's a lot of work and I don't begrudge someone not doing that. I'll be grateful someone presented their talk in a readable form in the first place.
[I do agree this page was hard to read, at least on mobile and at least in its initial version—it's much better now—but I've seen many others post these "annotated talks" online and the format itself is not necessarily bad: for instance see https://idlewords.com/talks/ (example: https://idlewords.com/talks/superintelligence.htm) or https://noidea.dog/talks (example: https://noidea.dog/impostor) or https://simonwillison.net/tags/annotatedtalks/ (example: https://simonwillison.net/2022/Nov/26/productivity/) — maybe just some minor tweaks to CSS like putting the text to the right of the images would make it easier to read.]
"Here's a picture of an NTP packet"
picture of a man sitting at a desk
The sense of entitlement to accuse someone of lacking empathy because they didn't present it in your preferred format is literally crazy to me.
Ironically enough, aren't you doing the same thing now, berating me for giving free information the wrong way? How about just learning from the advice and moving on?
I liked it.