The problem with articles like this is that they take one good clear simple point, "the existence of experts using heuristics causes predictable over-updates towards those heuristics", and pad it out with so many examples and allegories that, understandably, what the reader wants to talk about is the validity and accuracy of the examples. These, of course, aren't the point of the piece, but the point of the piece is so slight that it hardly bears discussing. Of course everyone looks to the actual content.