Can anyone give me a rational and technical criticism of this house:

https://www.reddit.com/r/architecture/comments/1n6tukb/op_says_this_house_is_boring_i_disagree_what_say/

So i dont like a lot but i dont dislike it.
Ill say what i like about it.

I like the open space.

I used to be b-boy in the past. And always hated houses full of rooms and furniture.

For me the ideal house is open like that with plenty of open space to workout and move around. Notice how if you push some things around you could turn it into a gym.

But thats me that my ideal house would be closer to a gym.

Though i know that spaces not being separated is terrible for climate/heating, acoustics, separation of functions.

But yeah most of the comments i see criticizing it are giving super ambiguous/esoteric critics, like:

"it lacks the sophistication"

"the interior is ghastly, it misses on so many levels"

"boring" "nightmarish"

Stuff Prince Charles would say to try sound intellectual.

I had to scroll down a lot until i found something reasonable like:

"That pour floor is going to be cold every day of the year. Maybe they did under floor heating."

Okay that is nice.

I hope one day we can criticize architecture without trying to sound edgy and pretensious. I dont like it, but i can understand that it depends on the taste if we are not criticizing technical things.