We're all losers. Even the best programmers in the world have difficulty writing bug-free code. Whatever tools we can leverage to make us lose less should be welcomed with open arms.
I consider myself a fairly strong programmer. I have worked with literally hundreds of programmers over my career. None have been better than me. Now I'm not the smartest person on the planet, I'm not even smarter than say Sheldon Cooper, but despite the article author's assertion, you cannot hire someone who has an IQ 50 points higher than mine.
All that said, I've recently done a couple of months of programming (in a very restrictive environment) in Javascript, and I yearn for a compiler.
Perhaps these tools do help "losers lose less"... but a tool is a force multiplier (bad tools are multipliers with a value less than one, and truly bad tools have negative multipliers :D Not all tools are bad.)
In the hands of an expert, the right tool can become a powerful weapon.
"I have worked with literally hundreds of programmers over my career. None have been better than me."
Really? In every aspect of programming? In every language? This is the typical prima donna bullshit that pervades this industry. I pity anyone who has to deal with you on a daily basis.
A negative-multiplier tool would allow you to apply negative force to get a positive result. So if you hire a bunch of those guys who make the code worse every time they touch it, and give them a negative-multiplier tool, then they'll make forward progress. And you can pay them almost nothing! You can hire day laborers who would otherwise be picking cabbage!
It is, in itself. His point is that if you're not a loser, then it's not particularly relevant to you. If you're a winner you'd presumably prefer to use a language intended to help winners win.
First you have to define what "popular" means. Do you only allow, say, C# and Java? I use Scala quite a lot. It has a vibrant community, increasing popularity, and it sure doesn't hold back on the advanced features.
While I grant that that's a harsh statement, would you disagree with what he says next?
"Our current popular languages are designed to help losers lose less."