Update 2024-05-03-python-you-have-problems.md

docs/blog/posts/2024-05-03-python-you-have-problems.md

@@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ Any time a huge amount of complexity is introduced into a system to solve some f
 
 It is totally absurd to me how much talent is wasted in solving these kinds of problems. In my view, the only reason why these problems are worth solving at all is because Python's momentum is so great that asking people to use something else is often just not practical. If it had obtained less popularity, my reaction would be to totally abandon the language altogether because these issues are real dealbreakers from a reliability and time efficiency perspective. The proliferation of packaging tools, of the existence of asyncio and function coloring, the large number of different implementations of the language itself (I mean come on, _seriously?_), all point to the fact that what was given to us in the reference implementation of the language (obviously, CPython) is just simply inadequate. So much incredible talent, creating admittedly incredible solutions, has been spent working around what is fundamentally a big stinky pile of :poop:.
 
-It should also be noted that one of Python's main selling points is that it's so easy to use, so much so that it's often the first language developers learn. This is only a shallow marketing tactic because once you peel back the veil and see the man behind the curtain, you realize how unfriendly becomes. This is in fact a common complaint amongst newcomers that the proliferation of tooling, and the lack of any real standard for just about _anything_, can make it difficult to become effective at the language in a professional environment.
+It should also be noted that one of Python's main selling points is that it's so easy to use, so much so that it's often the first language developers learn. This is only a shallow marketing tactic because once you peel back the veil and see the man behind the curtain, you realize how unfriendly it becomes. This is in fact a common complaint amongst newcomers that the proliferation of tooling, and the lack of any real standard for just about _anything_, can make it difficult to become effective at the language in a professional environment.
 
 It's also my general stance that languages are simply a means to an end. My main priority is not being an expert in a specific language, but to be an expert in delivering business results. When I find myself fighting with and being confused at a tool, it either means I'm just too stupid to understand the tool (which very well may be true), or the tool itself is just inherently confusing. In either case (me being dumb or the tool being dumb), it's serving as an obstacle towards my end goal. I certainly don't think I'm too stupid to understand Python because I have indeed used it to create huge, production-grade, business-critical applications in a number of domains. It's just that I think the complexity I was required to wrangle is not justified by the benefits of what Python offers, especially in comparison to other modern languages today.