My guess is the roast version looks at the repo details/descriptions (or at least a few of them - which is why the reply seems much more specific/cutting) where as far as I can tell the praise version here only looks at readme/top level profile info.
Hard to tell from the article if this is something specific to "social media" scrolling, or (as my guess would be) just a finding that reading via scrolling is potentially bad for your eyes.
Be interested to understand if other ways of consuming content (swiping pages or whatever) would be better, as I do almost all my reading on my phone these days, so would prefer not to screw my eyes.
Maybe it's a tech company thing but we were using irc for years before slack came about. We eventually swapped to hipchat as it was easier for less technical people to join, and later slack when that shutdown.
Almost every open source project I've worked on coordinated on irc back before slack/discord took over so it's hard to says text based communication tools are anything new. What I will give tools like slack is massively improving ease of use for less technical users, which has meant it's now used much more widely outside technical spheres.
Honestly, in my experience most the "good" PHP jobs tend to end up in the start-up space, where pace of development/sheer ability to get stuff done (PHP's strengths) are the primary drivers. As you move to bigger companies, more specialised languages tend take precedence as they can afford the increased dev time in order to achieve greater efficiency/throughput.
I still love PHP, as I like solving problems and pragmatically PHP is really really good at that. But at the end of day, everything is a trade off, and the trade-offs of PHP don't make sense everywhere.
In terms of bigger places, facebook still hire plenty of PHP devs, Slack as well - or at least they used too. Bumble (and the network of related sites) was heavily PHP a few years back too. Etsy you already mentioned. Quite a few "non-php" places still have a fair PHP estate that needs looking after too, even if they are slowly migrating away from them.
I don't really see what the risk is. So far as I follow the ultimate threat from the mods is that if reddit makes the proposed changes to the API, they'll stop modding. Given the changes will take a way a lot of the tools larger subs rely on to mod effectively its an unsurprising move.
If reddit wants to step up and moderate the site itself, it's free to, but if it wants volunteers to keep working for free it'll need to play ball with em in some way or another. That or play chicken and see if it wins.
It does seem like most studies show WFH workers being happier/healthier/more productive. Wouldn't necessarily take that as conclusive, but i've certainly not found much evidence beyond random anecdotes saying the opposite.
What is it that sets this apart from other similar solutions?