bricksmart

He's pointing out that the material in this article has been discussed ad nauseam and this doesn't present any new ideas.

Thank you for the reply. Having lurked on HN for a while, I'm used to some negativity, or at least very critical, comments. So when most of the comments for this piece appeared positive something seemed off.

Anyway, I appreciate the environment on HN and the steps users like you take to preserve it.

Followup: why the downvote? This article has a bizarre and amateurish ending:

  "Despite Tadini's losses, his methods have continued to 
  influence combat into the present. Mining and 
  countermining, with all their attendant surveillance and 
  engineering, are still staples of warfare."

This is actually worse than a passage from a test -- it sounds like a student essay written in response. It's little better than:

  In conclusion, Tadini's mining is still influential today.

which is vague, abrupt and unsubstantiated -- the article makes no mention of mining in the current day. Am I the only one who finds this odd?

Interesting subject, but why does it feel like I'm reading a passage from a standardized test?