Number of languages known [was Re: Python is readable] - somewhat OT

[rusi]

All this futuristic grandiloquence:

On Apr 3, 10:17 pm, Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.r... at gmail.com>
wrote:
> The crux of my view is that programming languages exist in part
> because computers in general are not smart enough to converse with
> humans on their own level, so we have to talk to them like autistic 5
> year-olds.  That was fine when we didn't have any other options, but
> all the pieces exist now to let computers talk to us very close to our
> own level, and represent information at the same way we do.  Projects
> like IBM's Watson, Siri, Wolfram Alpha and Cyc demonstrate pretty
> clearly to me that we are capable of taking the next step, and the
> resurgence of the technology sector along with the shortage of
> qualified developers indicates to me that we need to move now.

needs to be juxtaposed with this antiquated view

> I would argue that the computer is the tool, not the language.


... a view that could not be held by an educated person after the
1960s -- ie when it became amply clear to all that the essential and
hard issues in CS are about software and not hardware