But this is my point, I haven't been seeing any 64x64 px (logical pixels) hamburger menu icons out in the wild. That would be too big for mobile as well.
The hamburger menu buttons all seem normally sized to me when I make a browser window narrow on my desktop.
I think you may have misunderstood my comment. I'm saying I am seeing normally sized hamburger menus on desktop. You're using an example of 64x64, I'm saying I don't see that.
Although 16x16 is a little on the small side even for desktop. The point isn't just to click it, but to have it be prominent enough to see and notice as a primary action. It's about visibility, not touch area.
For example, on the SquareSpace homepage (an example someone else brought up) it's 30x18. That seems like a nice size to me. It's two pixels taller than the 16 you suggest, but the extra width helps make it a little more prominent. Especially since the width isn't taking away from anything else.
I can't tell what units you're measuring in, are you measuring hardware pixels on a hi-DPI screen? We're talking about logical pixels which is the only thing that makes sense to measure in and compare.
But comparing it with e.g. the refresh button on your browser, it's merely 17% taller than that, in your screenshot. So I literally don't know what "absolutely massive" you're talking about.
It seems perfectly fine to me. Maybe I'd make it a little narrower, but they probably wanted to balance the logo in the top left corner in terms of visual weight, so it makes sense.
If that's the clickable area, is someone complaining that's too large?
You've been able to select radio buttons by clicking on their text for decades now. On desktop. Often literally hundred of pixels wide.
Generous margins for clickable elements seems like a feature, not a problem. As long as they don't interfere with anything else (which they don't, here).
