Firstly, getting this out of my chest: It felt like a really good note, except for the graphs. The author acknowledges that he is pulling the Bell curve out of his ass, but somehow serves to illustrate his point. But for some reason the extra amount of information that would implicitly come from the internet seems uniformly distributed across qualities. I would have expected a taller (or wider) Bell curve if anything. Why even bother with graphs if there is no semblance of meaning to it? Was he aiming for the target audience's math fetish? I do appreciate silly illustrations, but I felt it distractingly pointless.

Having said that, it's nice to see that people acknowledge the ways that information was available, seeding the need to re-evaluate information dynamics.