> Makes me thing how maybe in the future we can have dynamic content like a Wikipedia article about a computer science topic that gets more specific the more programatically/academically inclined the audience is.

We already have a mechanism for this, which is simply to get increasingly nerdly as you go and let the reader bail out (or skip to the next section) as desired.

Newspaper articles are an extreme form of this, with the first paragraph a high level summary and then decreasingly relevant paragraphs with the explicit design objective that the editor / page layer-outer [1] can cut the article pretty much at any paragraph break. So the reader reads until their interest is sated and then stops.

Academic articles are (in principle) the extreme opposite of this, with a summary up front and then a largely coherent mass following.

[0] is the "d" in nerdly (or gnurdly) an MITism? The Mac's spell corrector doesn't like it.

[1] I have forgotten the word for this archaic job. This person did layout after the articles had been typeset.