Of course maybe I just haven't looked in the right places. :)
I have no data to back that up, but it certainly seemed to happen that way.
If only that were true. Like the OP I've been working with mostly legacy Django codebases the last few years and much of the same issues he raises could be applied to those projects as well.
When a daemon gets too big, we split it up.
That makes each writing each new part feel much more like a green-field exercise than you'd expect from a product this size.
Let that be a call for people to develop a) Rails experience b) testing, refactoring, working with legacy code experience
Because it means that there are going to be a lot of 3+ year old projects in 2 years that will need those skills.
Most of the other developers I know are older, have computer science and/or EE degrees, and have been around the startup block a few times, and have several greenfield projects under their belt.
I can say the same of C, C++ and Python in the context of my personal work history. Is Avdi's experience so unusual in the Ruby world? It seems that most development jobs primarily involve working on other people's code if the language has been around for any time at all.
Edited to add: I've also seen everything listed in the "But Rails is different!" section in every commercial project I've ever worked on. I suspect most developers that just want to hack away on commercial code without any discipline end up having nearly the same set of justifications, no matter what language they're using. (Especially that bit about ignoring/disabling warnings.)