Y Combinator is a VC firm that specializes in investing in early stage/new tech companies and one of the first to do it on such a public scale. Their most significant successful investment is likely Stripe. Dropbox and Airbnb are other companies which had a lot of initial funding from YC
What if you reached the linked page via another source?
It is bad style and disrespect to the reader to use abbreviations without explaining at least once their meaning.
There comes a point where you need to decide are you writing a targeted article or a beginner's introduction. If you can't assume any knowledge and you make articles for a more advanced audience so bloating and winding that whatever point you were making gets lost.
Not every article has to target the "everyone" audience.
What if we applied the standard to programming article? What if an article on rendering issues in mass effect and a patch in directx for the same had to include explanations for variables and for loops? It clearly weakens the article as there is value in getting to the point.
The problem is that the article doesn't put things into context but only uses abbreviations.
I had rather the suspicion that it is again a nonsense text from GPT-3.
When writing a programming article, it should at least be clearly mentioned somewhere, e.g. in the title.
Or do you often see articles where you can only see some code without explaining which software it is about
It's the personal blog of the current president of ycombinator; That's the relevant context. If you're on his personal blog, you at the very least have the tools to figure out the context.
No, it's bad style when you produce mass consumption content where your audience could have varying degrees of familiarity.
When you write hagiographical blog posts praising your teammates who are luminaries in the field, you write for the field. It's a sort of reverse shibboleth - you don't care for readers who know nothing and you increase the reader bond for those who do know. References (frequently to pop-culture) have a similar power. Terry Pratchett, for instance, does so very well with lots of things, including science¹.
Your invocation of the rule, actually, is an example of misunderstanding the purpose of a rule and misapplying it.
