I think the article has some valid (but not new) points, like "design is communication", but is otherwise handwavy and full of water. I couldn't bring myself to wade through trite/imprecise/self-contradictory passages ("interfaces are for information", "we interface because we are human", then "the purpose of information interfaces has always been to communicate more quickly, more deeply, to foster relationships, to explore, to measure, to learn, to build knowledge, to entertain, and to create"--so turns out not all interfaces are for information and instead the purpose of interfaces is communication? idk). The timeline of "information mechanisms" serves, like most of the text, unclear purpose and seems to be a hodgepodge of vaguely related concepts ("music", "Walkman", "Snapchat", "Small Speakers"). IMO the author can do better, this did not deserve unearthing from 2020 and I'd rather read Medium is the Message for example.