I really wish the dominant ethos of expository materials was less "here's why topic X is actually super simple" and more of "you—yes, you!—are capable of understanding difficult things"

@sliminality I tried really hard for this when I wrote Higher-Order Perl. “This is easy” seems like a funny thing to say about anything? I think “easy” and “difficult” don't work that way, most of the time. What some people find difficult, like calculus or being courteous, can be easy for others.

There are exceptions, of course. I don't object to describing NP-hard problems as hard. Or running a functional democracy.

@mjd I do think "hard" has a particular, more objective meaning when it's used in "hard problem" or "NP-hard", which also mitigates some of the semantic slippage.

@sliminality Yes, it's not at all the same thing.

And I think democracy is objectively hard, in the sense that it's been tried many times, problems have kept coming up, and often they haven't been successfully solved.

(Not to say it isn't worth doing. Just that it's hard!)