This was an interesting post by somebody who does have extensive experience with python itself and not afraid to admit python’s own shortcomings. Let’s focus on this statement:
there appears to be a noticable trend of embracing powerful static typing with local type inference.
I have always believed that one of the serious but covert reasons why people choose a language with dynamic typing is the perceived “flexibility” with which they can express themselves while omitting any kind of explicit specification of their intent. Statically typed languages where type inference is either nonexistent or ill-implemented are actually moving towards better type inference. Languages that by design evangelize dynamic typing are shoehorning into their own core some sort of “optional” type system.
Quintessentially, there is an implicit admission from the “dynamic” side that types are important, provided it is possible for them to use a type system without having to deal with its intricacies; type inference is where the interests of different kinds of people meet.