It's definitely anti-intellectual. But people who run this site themselves say they're interested in high signal to noise ratio.
I don't think those are good comparisons. Better example would be a post about how to write rigorous math proofs and then not giving a rigorous proof as an example.
Can we just ban coding posts that have no code? They usually give you an illusion you learned something but are a total waste of time. It's like reading a self-help post on following your biggest dreams or something. The hard part isn't these big beautiful ideas, it's how to actually put it in practice. How to actually take something away and measure whether abstractions or duplications are more costly in real code??
You're right, I exaggerated but I don't think this is a hard game. People spend several months right now on studying interviews. The topics are wide and scope enormous, hence so many complaints; some companies test you on languages, others on algorithms, data structures, dynamic programming, bit manipulations, SQL queries, scalability, unix internals, I could go on and on. On the other hand, there's only so many paths these past history conversations can go, and you know where they can poke at.
The problem with his interviews is that it's even more easily gamed. It doesn't really take a genius to go through their employment history and memorize blurbs that show learning technologies, applying it successfully while being humble and nice for one day.