Sure, and then what? If we keep the systems around that created this situation in the first place, we'll end up back where we started, just with new rich people.
Just to pick out the example of veganism: If all rich people are dead, but the masses still want cheap meat every single day, they WILL definitely reinvent factory farming, with all it's horrible environmental and ethical consequences.
Yeah, well, that's just Python for you. List usages is now an LSP feature for most languages, so will work with "lesser" editors too.
All that being said, I use Intellij with Java daily, so I can see where you're coming from. But for example Rust or Go works wonderfully with Neovim (or VSCode).
PHP the language has become pretty nice, but I recently had to work with a PHP CMS deployment, and it was an absolute pain to do. PHP frameworks seem to still exist in a world where you manually upload code to a manually configured server running apache. Dockerizing the CMS (uses Symfony) is/was an absolute pain.
I mean, we're rewriting everything in Rust, so there's no need to learn cmake anymore /s
To conter your comment a little bit, I think anyone doing coding for a living should absolutely use an editor that supports LSPs. They're an insanely helpful tool with zero downsides.
I disagree somewhat with their take, but there's definitely languages that cmoe with features built-in that reduce the need for a fancy IDE. For example, instead of null checks via annotations that the IDE has to parse and warn about, just have nullable types. Or instead of IDE features to generate a bunch of boilerplate, just don't require that boilerplate.
That being said, on the other side of the spectrum, anyone writing code without using an LSP is just throwing away productivity by the handfull.
But some people play them with just a Dance pad. Doesn't that, by your logic, mean they are too easy? Shouldn't they be even harder? Maybe they'd be even more famous. The point is that difficulty is relative, therefore there OBJECTIVELY isn't a correct difficulty. You're just lucky enough to fit into their "difficulty demographic".
But it's moot anyway. Games with easy modes will still get played with high difficulty by people that actually enjoy it. Your own enjoyment of a game should not depend on other peoples difficulty levels.
I think the core trait to look out for is willingness to work around personal issues. With time that might be an openness about your problems, at the very least. Maybe aiming for half an hour earlier, communicating status often and early. Fucking up is human, but not trying your best not to fuck up is a dick move.
The point is that even without that reason you wouldn't have any kids. It's not the cornerstone of your childfree-ness. Neither is it for me, which is why I recognize that it's morally lazy to rest on the imaginary laurels of not birthing children.
By that logic, every parent could ALSO claim they are doing their part for the earth. Simply by not having EVEN MORE children. Hell, maybe they are better than you because you only didn't have 2 kids, but they didn't have 4 additional kids. Thats twice the savings, twice the reason to not make the world a better place and blame everyone else!
If I buy my support staff "IT for Dummies", and they then, sometimes, reproduce the same/similar advice (turn it off and on again), I owe the textbook writers money? That's news to me.
But it's the idiots that CONSTANTLY argue that the world will be fine. The framing of it as protection of animals/the planet/the climate makes it incredibly easy for people to pretend it's optional, not directly related to them. This isn't a hypothetical point, EVERY SINGLE climate discussion I've ever witnessed some mouthbreather has argued that "the climate will continue to exist, it doesn't need protecting".
What needs protecting isn't the planet, the ecology, the animals or plants, it's US. It's ENTIRELY an US problem.
As someone that unironically wants to rewrite everything in Rust, but does Java for a living, Go started off horrible, but has become OK. Especially for that sweet spot between "too big for a shell/python script", but "not big enough to need perfect type checking/advanced tooling", Go is decent. I recently clobbered together a CLI tool for a customer that does some custom stuff involving S3 files. I disagree with it's biggest fans that it's really simple. Some of the syntax seems very weird, the error handling (while better than exceptions) is still extremely tedious and weak.
Honestly, the fact that the creators thought they knew better than EVERYONE ELSE that they didn't need generics, and argued against it FOR YEARS, just to finally add them now tells me everything I need to know about how they think of their users, and about whether they react in a timely and reasonable manner to needs of the community.
How so? The system of patriarchy is beyond any one individual to solve. Yet I'm damn certain you believe every man should still do their best not to contribute. Why should the system of animal exploitation (and environmental destruction, while we're at it) be any different?
Is it because one of these requires actual work on your side? You are the one measuring the same thing by two different standards.