> One confusion I have is how the author says that a method naming scheme is not operator overloading, when actually that's how it is always done in the languages I can name.

I think the author is drawing a distinction between allowing custom operators with custom precedence, versus allowing custom implementation of a fixed set of operators with fixed precedence. I'd agree that it's a poor choice of terminology, since we would generally call the latter "operator overloading".

> Personally, I wish I had a faster and statically typed Python. I love Python's infinite integers and its string handling (which I had no problem with in python2 either, so ymmv). My biggest gripe with Python in production is that it isn't statically typed.

Yeah, I loved Python until my codebases became too large to refactor safely. I've found Scala gives the best of both worlds - the mixed object/functional style is quite Python-like and the low-ceremony syntax can be used to look quite Python-like (if you avoid libraries that use a bunch of symbolic method names) - though I wish infinite integers were the default there too. (I can write literals as e.g. bi"123789890897094790" and use normal operators on them, so it's not the worst).