I might be in this case strict on being humble, but you won't hear that kind of comment from person that tries to share something good with world. Why should we judge good novelist based on being too novel to understand for average person? Should I call myself better than others, because some don't know Kubernetes? That would be poor way to judge in general and for me, it's not ok to gatekeep knowledge in any way.

> you won't hear that kind of comment from person that tries to share something good with world.

First, not every literary thing worth sharing with the world needs to be at the intellectual level of Donald Duck magazine.

Second, some folks may want to challenge the world to rise above mediocrity.

If not, we'd all still be programming in BASIC with line numbers.

In general I agree, but details are important here. I don't disagree that progress is important, I don't disagree that everything requires some prerequisites, but I don't agree that being novel or hard to understand is positive on its own.

I also don't agree with her mentality "I don't write it for average people, because they won't understand it, so deal with it", because even most complex and advanced knowledge can be understand by average person, if that person puts effort and someone offers support, but instead she prefer to put herself in group of people that believe that their work is so great that only greatest minds can understand it and others should find something more ordinary.

You can either create "great" content and brag how great, hard and mystic it is or support others in understanding it, let them formulate their own opinions on your work and create positive community around it.

Pynchon would probably say something worse.

Fwiw, while I only know a bit of Kubernetes, I definitely liked myself more before I knew it. :)