Random thought: "Your interface/system/social media platform shouldn't have advanced functionality visible because less sophisticated users won't be able to understand it" is something I hear from time to time, and disagree with.

What are we trying to do? Limit human capability to the "least sophisticated" denominator, in case people are made uncomfortably aware of areas where they have capacity for growth? How has that worked out for us over the past couple of decades?

Appreciate there's...

... a sweet spot. It does make sense to make an interface intuitive and not overwhelming, so that people with all levels of technological comfort have a good experience using it. More sophisticated features don't all need to be in the most immediately visible interface. Geek pride in intimidating those less technically competent isn't a good thing.

But "you shouldn't have things that I can't use" also isn't a good thing, and I think it definitely exists as a phenomenon.

There was a point in time when people becoming aware of the limits of their own capabilities felt moved to learn and at least try to improve their knowledge and skills.

Recently, though, this seems to have been replaced with an entitled and misguided "people who have or use skills or knowledge that make me feel my own are lacking are wrong, and should be stopped and shamed".

From the dumbing down of factual content to the disintegration of democracies, it's not moving us in a good direction.