Therefore the article itself is slimy, it is overt, and you are reading it VIA a tech-blog.
The slimy idea COULD be valid if there is the belief that BECAUSE this article is linked by a tech-blog (HN), that it is a technical article. The OP, https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=shoggouth could be the person you'd want to direct the critque at. However since the mandate of HN is not restricted to tech articles, merely interesting tech related stuff often with an entrepreneurial bent, it is appropriate.
A national general daily newspaper.
> Guessing that wasn’t the intention.
No guessing needed.
Therefore the article itself is slimy, it is overt, and you are reading it VIA a tech-blog.
The slimy idea COULD be valid if there is the belief that BECAUSE this article is linked by a tech-blog (HN), that it is a technical article. The OP, https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=shoggouth could be the person you'd want to direct the critque at. However since the mandate of HN is not restricted to tech articles, merely interesting tech related stuff often with an entrepreneurial bent, it is appropriate.
So, not slimy in any way.
* https://www.thetimes.com/static/about-us/