[Aloha]

If there is only one correct answer to a problem in a given language, people will shunt that creativity to architecture or elsewhere. People still want to be creative in their work, programming and system administration is fundamentally a creative job.

Which would you rather have, a script that was too clever by half, or a system architecture that was too clever by half?

It's a whole lot easier to fix the script than it is the system architecture.

[skrtskrt]

So - if people instead could use a shell/script language that offers some more correctness/guarantees or fewer pitfalls, they will subconsciously make bugs in the system outside of that script because creativity?

[Aloha]

If they dont get to be creative in solving the problem - if their job is simply to be a human emitter of YAML, then that creativity will be spent elsewhere.

[skrtskrt]

Not sure how we got from wishing we could use a language with fewer footguns than bash to… human emitter of YAML whose creativity has been ripped from them, so they will now design overly-clever systems as some sort of creative outlet?

[psd1]

...technical debt as a safety valve against surplus engineering talent!