Many of those patterns that you list aren't actually trends resulting from received wisdom -- they're dark patterns, known to be actively hostile to the user. Common wisdom regarding UX would vigorously contraindicate their use, but they continue to be used because people either don't know or, more likely, don't care.

I've seen these dark patterns justified by "UX experts" like so:

1) Make a A/B test with an annoying pop-up sign-up box and an ordinary unobtrusive one.

2) Data shows that more people sign up using the pop-up.

3) Obviously people want to sign up, but can't find the unobtrusive box.

4) Hence, the pop-up design helps people achieve their goal (of signing up) better and is therefore more user friendly.

I think there is some herd mentality on design trends, but overall with UI patterns it's actually useful to follow certain standardized patterns so you don't have to train the user that much.

All of the things you described are not really any good UI or design patterns, but probably something from a "growth hacker", that were a/b tested and increased engagement metrics, so they got added. They didn't get added because someone saw them somewhere else, or the designer really wanted to add social media sharing buttons, 3rd party toolbars or interrupting the user with useless stuff.

There has clearly been a trend towards invisible search boxes that are only activated once you click on a hard to spot icon.

This article is a welcome antidote.

they kind of suggest to do that though, at the end of point 7

>This reads like a summary of what most are already doing. I can't shake the feeling some of these wisdoms could trendy things that are just part of the herd mentality that plagues UI design.

This basically describes all of Babich's writing. He even names some of his articles "Popular Trends in..." or "Popular Techniques for...", but basically all of them are more or less a recap of what's trendy in one facet of UI/UX design.