Maybe not the greatest blogger, but certainly the most wrong blogger: https://danluu.com/zitron/

Discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49526069

For a long time, even when I disagreed with Ed I appreciated his earnestness and clarity of intent, but after reading that Wired profile that came out and learning that his day job involves doing PR for AI companies, I can't even take what he's saying at face value

Ed Zitron's predictions have been proven hilariously wrong for years. So you can't really claim that he's uniquely insightful. If we're going to set insight aside, and look at his credentials as "the last great blogger", the qualification of:

> An individual who, with no resources or special standing or institutional support, simply goes online, does his research, and starts writing,

could apply to a huge range of bloggers, thought leaders, substackers, and straight up shitposters, many of whom get even more attention than Ed. In fact, this type of personality is much more influential and popular these days than they have ever been.

If this person like's Ed's writings, and believes that his predictions could still pan out some day, I'm not going to take that away from them. But coming up with this strange criteria of being a "last great blogger" that Ed doesn't even meet that well seems like a sleight of hand.

I've chosen to believe that the author perished in front of their keyboard as soon as they embedded the YouTube link; their body must have slumped forward at precisely the angle needed to bump their head into their mouse until the left-click button collided with a book and clicked the 'publish' button.

How else could you explain writing, like, half of an essay puffing up a fellow blogger without actually making the case for why you like him?

The quoted passage makes one of the great mistakes in analyzing an industry like this: assuming that people are stupid and that is why they make bad decisions. If you want actual insight assume that people in positions to make consequential decisions are smart and well-informed (they probably have far more information than you or I) and then ask why they still make bad decisions.

There are often other incentives at work, structural issues, etc., and sometimes the answer is that their decisions weren't actually as bad as you assumed.