I am not smart enough to know what is lazy writing vs good writing
Neither are the people saying it.
I don't think that's it. But possibly they (like most people) never spent a lot of time writing comedy. As someone who spent a number of years writing comedy for stage, local screen, and newspapers (very local/low level, this is not a 'look at me' post) I think I empathize with writers and understand why they do what they do a lot of times better than most people. I'm also less demanding and more easily able to suspend disbelief. You can put almost anything under a microscope and pick it to pieces, for me the bottom line is : is it funny? That's basically it.
I was being flippant and a little mean.
I agree with Floppo's tastes in a lot of things and I know he isn't dumb. And I am sure a lot of the other people criticizing the "lazy writing" aren't dumb either. But the bottom line for me is the same as yours: does it work as comedy?
Kramer plugging a whale's hole with a golf ball and then George Constanza removing it wasn't the least bit realistic either, but it worked.
I realize Silicon Valley isn't just comedy, it is also satire, which Seinfeld generally wasn't. And satire has to have elements of realism in order to be effective, but it doesn't have to (and probably can't) be totally realistic.