> This doesn't mean we should prefer "new safe technologies", it means our recruiting should far more stringent and our education far more formal (as in an actu

> This doesn't mean we should prefer "new safe technologies", it means our recruiting should far more stringent and our education far more formal (as in an actual useful programming degree). I think the ironic thing here is that these "approved" languages are both less safe and less expressive. Statically typed functional languages like Haskell and OCaml allow much more correct code and reject much more wrong code compared to something like Java or Go. I'd even go as far as to argue that in some ways, Haskell is more expressive than the mainstream dynamic languages (Ruby, Python, JS etc). Now, if your developers are really "idiots" (which to me is a very condescending thing to assume, but that's a different story...), then maybe they won't even be able to get their code to type check in the first place and ship no code at all :)