I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but this entire concept within the space of computer science is cargo cult repetition.
Cognitive load as the general HN viewer knows it doesn't exist. (Or at least, if the concept solely consists of "thinking hard! thinking many things more hard!", it's not worthy of a phrase)
Cognitive load, and cognitive load theory, do exist as concepts, outside of computer science. Yet none of it is reflected in HN posts. Somebody just heard the phrase once, thought it sounded cool, didn't learn about, and started blogging, making up what they thought it meant. Without the actual body of knowledge and research, its use in computer science is just buzzword fuckery, its understanding by the casual HN reader clear as mud. Without nuance, research and evidence, it's nonsense masquerading as wisdom.
If all you know is parroted anecdotes and personal experience, you're not doing science, you're doing arts & crafts.
Cognitive load as the general HN viewer knows it doesn't exist. (Or at least, if the concept solely consists of "thinking hard! thinking many things more hard!", it's not worthy of a phrase)
Cognitive load, and cognitive load theory, do exist as concepts, outside of computer science. Yet none of it is reflected in HN posts. Somebody just heard the phrase once, thought it sounded cool, didn't learn about, and started blogging, making up what they thought it meant. Without the actual body of knowledge and research, its use in computer science is just buzzword fuckery, its understanding by the casual HN reader clear as mud. Without nuance, research and evidence, it's nonsense masquerading as wisdom.
If all you know is parroted anecdotes and personal experience, you're not doing science, you're doing arts & crafts.