How about OP does anyway? Bash as a scripting language is fucking great!
Since when is simplicity an argument against writing programs? Whether scripts or frameworks? "Hard to read" is not neccessarily an inherent trait[1] of the language, and more likely wrong on some PEBKAC level.
I have a customised environment at near 10k lines of bash in 5 projects, all of it in the correct tool for the job, aka a proper scripting language, so I can suggest another use for your thumb :-)
I implemented it in Python (while reading from that LISP version, a Java version, and Melanie Mitchell's "Analogy-Making as Perception"): https://github.com/jalanb/co.py.cat
Because "The custom and practice of the web has always been that publicly accessible pages are served without payment"
The publishers are not offering content subject to a fee (which I am not paying). They are offering content for free, and also offering ads for free.
Accepting one of their free offers, and rejecting another of their free offers is not the same thing as "just consume ... without paying"
Some news sites do offer their content subject to a fee, and if they were interesting enough then I would pay that fee. But, because none of those sites (that I have encountered) are worth it, in comparision with the freely-served pages of the net, I choose not to pay those sites, and forego their content.
But if they are not explicitly charging a fee, then we fall back to the default custom and practice, which is that they offer content for free, and ads for free, and I have the right to accept as many, or few, of those offers as I like.
I'm a programmer by profession, but at one stage there were no such jobs available, so I went back to teaching. Teaching office computer skills (typing, Microsoft Office, drawing apps, ...) to kids who were "*-challenged", i.e. blind, deaf, mentally impaired and disturbed, and others.
The most exhausting, and rewarding, job I've ever had.
Vincent (one of the blind guys) ran into trouble with Word. Can't remember what the problem was, but I solved it with a simple Word macro. His flabber was gasted - not only did he then grok the fact that all the programs had code behind them, but the code was all plain text, hence was often easier to comprehend in a screen reader than what he heard from most programs. Even text in Word can be a pain to hear when every font change is also announced.
Of course the text might be easier to hear, but the logic behind can also tougher to grasp. But Vincent loved it and wanted to learn, and I much preferred teaching VB than teaching Word, so we soon had a programming class going within the office skills class. Some found it interesting, but Vincent found it easy and got a City & Guilds 425 Application Programming cert from the course. Went on to get a job programming before I did.
So I'd say he got into it the same way as me - one day I sat down in front of a terminal and wrote some code, which eventually worked, and I was hooked!
It was just easier for me because the terminal was more accessible and no-one thought it was "obvious" that I wouldn't be able to use it.
What I find strange about this test is that it also weeds out 99.5% of candidates who can't seem to google for "programming interview" before turning up at one! Amazing how many (3rd year Comp Sci) students have never heard of it.
Actually, speaking as a former addict, I would call it simple.
Damned hard, fucking painful, betimes hopeless, ..., but the most consistent memory from my early recovery was the simplicity of the process. There really was only one thing important: stay clean.
In my own case I aimed for staying clean for 2 years. And for those two years that was not "the most important thing", it was the only thing that mattered. Other factors helped too (supportive family was next most important), but I think I would not now be clean without the simplicity of that bright line rule of 2 years.