I found this a really thought provoking article. It talked about frameworks as a reason that languages don't guarantee engineers know-how but I wonder if they might also play into the homogenization of language choice?<p>Programming nowadays involves a lot less building from scratch, and a lot more library choice, which is one thing that ends up counting in favour of languages with big ecosystems (like JavaScript and Python).<p>Widespread technologies (like Python) have a bigger choice of framework innovation (like fast api for example), so there are definitely cases where not innovating with your language choice gives you more options to innovate with a framework choice further down the line?
This article is somewhat of a backlash against the Boring technology idea, and then conflating it with extreme risk aversion, and suppression of languages that aren't on the top 10 of the Stackoverflow popularity chart.<p>I'd argue that Boring doesn't say that - it says be Boring in places that don't matter. If choosing an "interesting" language meets your needs, go for it and get everyone trained up, but maybe try to know the cost/benefit of that choice first.