What's interesting is how I opened Safari's reader mode to digest this 5000+ word polemic, and then noticed for the first time a new option to summarize its contents. A few seconds later I had a clear idea of what the author's thesis is, without being under the false impression that it had conveyed its finer points.

Basically, yeah. Pyto is good and getting better. I recommend it over Pythonista to everyone who wants to run Python natively and doesn't already have a bunch of Pythonista code to support.

The main difference is in the UI libraries each app provides, which aren't cross-compatible. If you want to run plain text-based Python and work with a REPL, they feel very similar. Pyto ship with Python 3.10, though.

Definitely dynamic typing is not about modeling the world. And it's much broader than that. Static typing, strict or loose, also isn't about modeling the world. OO design isn't about modeling the world. These things are successful because they're effective methods for organizing code. They're about as useful for modeling the world as the Dewey Decimal System is.

And that's fine! 'Modeling the world' is a grandiose philosophical kind of activity and usually not something you need to do when you develop software.

Protobufs don't follow this model. For example, a User message type will often be defined in one place and code generated from it in multiple languages. Every server and client uses essentially the same type, modified as suitable for that language. As a result, clients are usually working with types that they don't control and that have many more fields than they actually use.

Maybe clients should declare their own types containing just what they need and copy the data into them from the protobufs? But this does get tedious. On the other hand, in a schemaless JSON system, there is nothing statically checking that the clients and servers have compatible ideas of what a message should contain.