What's wrong in expanding on a topic that was barely mentioned in the article?
Your parent wrote detailed reasoning that's not present in the article.
Also this type of uncharitable comment is against Hacker News guidelines: "Please don't comment on whether someone read an article".
There can be no discussion with GGP since he obviously didn't read the article. They think the article will claim Rust supplants Python. They think there is a performance advantage in using Julia instead of Python (but the Python code is just calling C, C++, and Rust as described in the article). GGP thinks there will be a tipping point where Julia has more libraries than Python but this is also addressed in the article.
There is no expanding on topics barely mentioned in the article. As far as GGP is concerned there was just a headline and they Kanye'd with "Julia is the best". As far as I care, mods can delete the comment and subtree.
It warms my heart to see people don't read TFA. Like at all.
From TFA:
> But it was important to clean the air of any possible misunderstanding before getting started. I don’t believe Rust will replace Python as the language of choice for ML - it just isn’t happening, it’s not a thing, neither today or tomorrow.