That isn't how any of this works. We don't get new innovative databases because of small startups deciding they want to roll their own database as part of buil

That isn't how any of this works. We don't get new innovative databases because of small startups deciding they want to roll their own database as part of building their new fangdangled AI thing. We get new innovative database either by new innovative database companies that rightfully spend their time and effort trying a new idea in the space or out of huge companies with R&D budgets to build such things, like Spanner. Startups choosing boring tech for everything that isn't their core/critical innovative area should actually accelerate innovation by focussing effort more efficiently. I do agree that the whole hiring aspect of it is hot garbage though. If Haskell is the best fit for what you are making and is considering boring in your field (say you are doing verification) then it makes perfect sense to use it even if the pool is smaller because a) people that stick to Haskell despite its difficulties probably have more passion for the craft and b) it's way more likely someone that knows Haskell has some exposure to your field, verification in this case. Same can apply to lots of "niche" languages/tools/etc. Boring is relative to what you are working on. I build distributed systems primarily. For me boring is Java. I imagine C++ is boring for game devs/GPU folks. etc.