Go is not cool, it's boring and readable. I don't need a diagram to understand what the code is doing compared to Java. I say that with deep respect for the JVM and all the problems that are solved with it. It's an incredible ecosystem.
I'm productive in Go because I realise most of my time isn't spent typing, it's thinking. I shy away from over abstraction and lean heavily towards composition.
If you're solving a problem that requires complicated type system - don't use Go. If you're writing a UI - don't use Go. If you like 20 layers of abstraction - don't use Go.
If you're writing a product like I am, with similar constraints, then Go is an excellent fit.
People for some reason like to pretend everyone is working on the same problem that they are, and have the same requirements they do.
This person doesn't like Go, and that's fine. I have no doubt I'd be able to solve their problem in Go, and I have no doubt they'd be able to solve my problem in Java.
Thats fair! I just don't agree with the readable part and thinking. I personally get tired having to look at all the archaic boilerplate to find the actual logic that I want to reason about.
Carmack’s tweet feels out of touch. He says we should focus only on business value, not engineering. But what made software engineering great was that nerds could dive deep into technical challenges while delivering business value. That balance is eroding - now, only the business side seems to matter.