This post reads a bit inflammatory to me and I take issue with most of your points.

> > everyone hates [Perl] because it’s “too hard to maintain” and too “strange.”

> I didn't know everyone hates Perl and I also didn't know those were the reason.

More accurately: nobody cares about Perl. Not 'nobody', but most people. It's hyperbole. You might argue that there is still a lot of Perl around according to programming language popularity metrics, but very few if any new things are being done with Perl, at least in this neck of the woods.

> How is javascript like assembly?

Explained in other comments. It's more like bytecode. Many other languages are compiled to JavaScript (hundreds?)

> > There’s a similar explosion of JavaScript implementations on server side and in other languages, leading to issues with compatibility and runtime bugs.

> What is this based on? I haven't seen many problems with compatibility and runtime bugs in the Node ecosystem at all.

I've used systems that use other JavaScript interpreters than V8. Also I think he may be referring to incompatibility between browsers and server. Compare to Python or Ruby where there is a standard C implementation used the vast majority of the time and then a manageable number of competing implementations that can easily be ignored for compatibility reasons.

> > Still don’t believe that JavaScript is the new Perl? Compare jQuery to Perl CGI. Nobody actually does plain “JavaScript” programming for the web anymore, not really anyway. Do they use the core language? Yes. But we no longer use any of the built-in JavaScript->HTML functionality directly.

> Only holds limited truth for browser development. Everybody using jquery is using plain Javascript.

I don't understand. In my experience of web development, we are using JQuery, which is a Javascript library that abstracts most things you do in the browser just as Perl CGI is a library that abstracts most things to do with HTTP. You appear not be refuting what he wrote, but simply claiming he is wrong. What do you mean by saying that everybody using JQuery is also using plain Javascript?

> > jQuery is the glue that holds together the JavaScript ecosystem, provides browser compatibility, and it admittedly does a pretty good job.

> what?

Yes, yes, and yes. What issue do you take with this statement?

> > however, sooner or later, the lack of language constructs like truly enforceable namespace boundaries, and the general mess created when teams get a little bit bigger is going to set in.

> Name spacing is easily solved using module loaders and proper scoping.

His complaint is that it's not enforced. Sure, it's "easy" to use module loaders and proper scoping, but anybody is free to ignore them and boy do they!

> > We ARE inherently lazy and most of us will ignore nearly any best practice or principle once “that deadline” gets too close.

> Sorry, this just means you're a shitty developer and/or can't manage deadlines very well.

No, "you're" not a shitty developer, lots of real people working in a real companies are. Successful languages make it impossible to be a shitty (read: disorganized) developer in these respects. People who work in enterprise say this over and over as do, surprisingly, people in the programming languages community. Head over to Lambda the Ultimate or just take a look at the design choices that languages like Haskell make.

> > Still, you don’t see that many big Python and Ruby shops either (Google is an exception,)

> His exception is a pretty large one. And besides that, which companies has the author studied?

It's perfectly fine to include a statement of anecdotal truth in a blog post. Want some data? Take a look at TIOBE: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index..... The popular static languages are more popular than the popular dynamic languages by a factor of 4:1.