All: some comments below have taken a tack that's not good for HN: seizing on one line, in which the author was obviously downplaying herself, then piling on with pedestrian indignation. That makes for lame discussion—equal parts sour and boring. The value of HN is curiosity. If you find yourself driven to post like that, please wait until curiosity is what you're feeling instead. Then you'll respond to something interesting in this unusual article. Or perhaps you'll find something more interesting elsewhere. Either is fine, but piling on is for other places.
There's a site guideline that covers this: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." It applies to articles too.
There's a site guideline that covers this: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." It applies to articles too.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html