Mixins are composition! They don’t describe what a type is (“circle” is a “shape”, etc) but rather what they can do (“circle” can have its area calculated, it can be drawn, it can be serialized, etc). Mixins in Python just so happen to be implemented by adding base classes.
Inheritance itself isn’t really a problem. It usually only matters when you have unnecessarily deep hierarchies, where a change in a base class can change functionality in dozens of classes in an unintentional way. Similarly, it can add complexity once the hierarchy is deep enough, but only really if you throw too much into the base classes.
Python’s ABCs are more of interfaces though, which is why despite Python using base classes to “inherit” them, a lot of that is really composition (or putting a class together from parts) rather than inheriting and overriding implementation details from a parent/grandparent/etc type.





If the AI bubble pops, you can bet the layoffs will be the result of AI, though not in the way people usually mean by this. Honestly, as much as I don’t want to see what it does to the world, I’m still curious what would/will happen.
You simply cannot replace people with AI. The statement itself is nonsense. Even so-called “agentic” AI cannot replace an employee in all aspects of work. You would need AGI to approach that.
Like the article mentions, it’s just an excuse to fire people.