I'm well-aware that bash is a (if not the) popular choice on desktops and servers, but my terse and somewhat snarky answer was motivated by two other factors:
1. Not only do distributions like Debian or Ubuntu use dash, but various other shells are becoming more relevant to programmers due to their inclusion in special-purpose systems, such as devices running with a Busybox-userspace (which includes pretty much every Android phone, for instance).
2. If the article claims to have any educative value, it should definitely mention that this is something about a particular shell. Assuming the author isn't lying about his use of nix systems (since the diversity of shells is common knowledge to anyone seriously using Unices), the other logical choice is that saying bash instead of Linux isn't as cool in terms of SEO. The WWW is cluttered enough with every marketing drone hiring cheap labour on freelancer.com to fill it with bad spinoffs just to promote their semi-scam business, making any kind of legitimate information so hard to find you'd think it's 1998 again for some topics; it itches me on a personal* level when I see programmers doing that. We should know better.
Debian uses dash as the default system (that is: scripting) shell, and what you'll typically find /bin/sh symlinked to (OpenBSD don't truck such nonsense and gives you statically-linked Bourne when you ask for sh, and there's a pretty good argument for why that should be). I actually got in the habit of writing bash (not sh) scripts some time back. My understanding is that the article was referring to commandline tricks, which would generally indicate bash.
Defaults do have their use, though from what I saw of the article it was hardly rigorous enough to even note what defaults it was referring to.
Agreed with you on the quantity of low-quality information out there. Google seems to be badly losing its edge in winnowing wheat from chaff (as does HN).
1. Not only do distributions like Debian or Ubuntu use dash, but various other shells are becoming more relevant to programmers due to their inclusion in special-purpose systems, such as devices running with a Busybox-userspace (which includes pretty much every Android phone, for instance).
2. If the article claims to have any educative value, it should definitely mention that this is something about a particular shell. Assuming the author isn't lying about his use of nix systems (since the diversity of shells is common knowledge to anyone seriously using Unices), the other logical choice is that saying bash instead of Linux isn't as cool in terms of SEO. The WWW is cluttered enough with every marketing drone hiring cheap labour on freelancer.com to fill it with bad spinoffs just to promote their semi-scam business, making any kind of legitimate information so hard to find you'd think it's 1998 again for some topics; it itches me on a personal* level when I see programmers doing that. We should know better.