Ruby survives on affection, not utility. Let's move on.

Archived version: https://archive.is/20251204034843/https://www.wired.com/story/ruby-is-not-a-serious-programming-language/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 11 months ago

The article starts with a lie, imprinting for computer users and the importance for UX is discussed for at least 20 years, see: Baby Duck Syndrome(wikipedia).

One can only think of something like this as "their own little theory", if they are uninformed in both programming and psychology which, after reading this stain of an article, is not far fetched. The correct psychological effect to point out here would be Dunning Kruger (wikipedia).

  • source