I agree there is an apparent tone of misandry in some of the rhetoric of the left but the actual beliefs you cite are (with the exception of a few) things men on the right say about other men.

This sounds like a re-branding of a cryptocurrency/DAO scheme. It's too abstract for conventional consumers to understand and too game-able for serious participants to not be wary of. Who is this for?

The reason we aimed for minimal "accidental complexity" up to now was directly related to the cost/pain of changing and maintaining that code. Hasn't the economics of maintenance and change shifted so much that accidental complexity isn't actually all that expensive/painful?

I think a bit of refactoring, renaming and restructuring has been helpful for maintainability but recently I've been a little less inclined to worry about the easy readability of function bodies and fine implementation details. It still feels wrong but I can't justify the effort anymore.

Spamcorp services are the future. Don't resist it, that would be futile.

I thought it was a typo at first but wikipedia explained:

The Sword of Damocles is an ancient Greek moral anecdote, an allusion to the imminent and ever-present peril faced by those in positions of power.

Shor's algorithm is a quantum algorithm for finding the prime factors of an integer

Art works without popular appeal can become highly treasured by some.

Open source software doesn't have to be ambitious to be worthwhile and useful. It can be artful, utilitarian or a artifact of play. Commercial standards shouldn't be the only measure of good software.

VC for conventional SaaS is dead.

We've successfully found some strong patterns for structuring programs that transform data in various ways for the kinds of programs Wirth was imagining. The best patterns have proven themselves by being replicated across languages (for example discriminated unions and pattern matching) and the worst have died away (things like goto and classical inheritance).

There's still work to do to find better languages though. A language is good if it fits the shape of the problem and, while we've found some good patterns for some shapes of problems, there are a lot more problems without good patterns.

I had hoped there'd be more languages for everyday end-user problems by now. At the start of the SaaS era it seemed like a lot of services were specific solutions that might fit into a more general modelling language. That hasn't happened yet but maybe a programming language at just the right level of abstraction could make that possible.