I think you’re taking “necessary” literally, whereas the author is posing a question about morality.

Why do you imagine that =1931 wouldn’t be equally confusing in some future decamillenium? Arabic numerals have only been around for (charitably) 0.12 decamillenia. Sorry, =.12 decamillenia.

NSDR, rather—Non-Sleep Deep Rest.

Why on earth should your brand new account be considered trustworthy when it comes to commenting on either party?

It shouldn't, nor should anyone's accounts on most topics. You should do the research and draw your own conclusions.

Yes and the conclusion is pretty clear that most people believe the article not your comment.

It's hard to do your own research when all the sources are polluted with a character assassination by a competitor

Not that it couldn’t be trivial in the abstract, but I’m struggling to imagine a use for a nested list item containing a table of blockquotes. It doesn’t seem at all surprising that a tool wouldn’t anticipate that.

Things from the design world, like Acceptance Criteria would happily require it.

Is a lightweight easy-to-read plain text markup language the right tool for that job?

Absolutely! The writers are generally not highly technically experienced, but have to produce highly technical documents that need to be regularly reviewed and changed for years at a time.

Of course it’s not a given as to any particular person, but regardless, it’s the right presumption.

And yes, of course there are things outside your control. Is that really “equally worthy” of your consideration and energy?

Yes. Questions like, "Should I work to 'do little things' intended to put a given coworker 'on an upward spiral'?" versus, "Should I insulate myself from or minimize blowback where any action is going to be received poorly because my incompetence is considered a foregone conclusion?" and, "How long should I remain at an organization where such things occur?" are all things that relate to decisions that are in your control—or at least might be, with enough of a forward-looking defense early on (if you fall into the group of those unlucky enough to need to ponder them).

Really, though, my comment was rather more intended to prompt introspective questions like, "Even if I'm personally on safe footing at my company, is it afflicted by this sort of thing in a way that impacts people who aren't me? And what can I do to either neutralize or minimize the negative consequences those people might experience?" (Readers who are paying attention will notice that this is a form of creating spirals of success for others, as the person I responded to recommended, but an emphasis on the fact that the targets of those actions can be people who have a lesser standing, rather that aiming laterally or upwards.)

For what it’s worth, I don’t think there’s much about Gleam’s design that is specific to “the functional patterns the BEAM was built for.” If you’re getting stuck in abstraction hell, consider asking the community for advice on what would be more idiomatic.

The article admits that the 700k figure “assumes the worst-case scenario that you take the high valuation of the financial authorities (factor 13.75) as base valuation for your exit tax. Instead, you could also find someone to assess the real value of your company, which is likely lower…”

A reasonable person could absolutely think it’s fair to impose a very high exit tax on someone who doesn’t want their books examined even when it would save them money.

If you ever had to deal with German tax authorities - assume the actual worst case scenario.

Perhaps a stack-based language like Uiua would be well-suited.

I don't think concatenative languages immediately obviate structured editing, but they sure do help.

Might be a case of ginned up accusations of “poor management” to cover for political animus.