A post like this is worse than that ones that it criticizes.

You're right that commenters are idly speculating, but that's what people do in conversation: they ramble through personal associations. HN is an internet watercooler, meaning we're here for human conversation, hopefully with an accent on curiosity. It's no sort of scientific publication or journal. It's welcome to draw on such material for conversation here, but not required.

Treating normal chatter as inferior fodder for a snarky putdown is anti-conversation. It turns away from the topic, makes curious interchange less likely, and introduces hostility, which invites others to do the same. It makes people less likely to share what happens to be at the top of their head about things. In other words, a bummer.

It's common on HN, and I assume in many places, for people to react to what they don't like / disagree with in others by (a) making a generalization about the group as a whole, and then (b) making a supercilious remark about it. The underlying message seems to be: I'm here like the rest of you, but I'm better.

I don't mean this as a personal criticism! I do the same at times, and probably everyone does. It's ultimately a kind of self-protection. But because it negates the kind of conversation that we're trying for on HN (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html), it's within scope of moderation to ask people not to do it.

You are of course welcome to express your view in an open/positive way rather than a closed/negative way. This is always possible.