Because there's a vast difference in the type of mindset associated with Python for most tasks in contrast to assembly. The more abstract the language and the model, the more linguistic skills are involved because of how the language covers the underlying mechanics. The lower you go in level (having to work with pointers and stacks in C e.g.), the closer you are to the actual graph of the code in question, the more "math" are involved. Keep in mind, math isn't just algebra - I'm talking about graphs, and sets and stuff like certain techniques (like recursion). I mean, just how does reading assembly code involve linguistic skills other than decoding the "verbs" - the reconstruction of code into a graph is purely a mathematical concept. And perhaps, the real question is just how much "math" is involved in language - which frankly, depends on the language. I'm taking two somewhat extreme cases from both ends of the spectrum - I mean if writing some SCADA stuff is done in schematics, is it now the visual cortex that is solely used? It's math because language in fact can be best described using math. It's how the damnable lexical analyzer that feeds into the computer works. It's simply highly formalized with usually little in the way of being context-sensitive. I mean, this is old stuff, basically Chomsky's work. Are we just trying to prove that the brain has specific functions or map them? Because it's fine identifying what exactly goes in the process of programming, but coding is a subset skill of programming - they're different notions. A code is a rewriting, a shortened form, programming is building a machine (quite literally actually) to solve a specific problem in a given set of inputs. I'd go on about rediscovering the wheel or just going after research funds but it's really just interdisciplinary breakage.

and play everything by Sid Meier and Microprose.

..is switch to Linux wherever possible (without Wine). Sorry, GNU/Linux.

True, but let me rectify: What kind of open source software other than perhaps LibreOffice or gimp would most people be unacquainted with already? If it's academic,research,engineering,or development software they've pretty much looked into it. Most users just need an office suite, a browser, and a media player. That means stuff like LibreOffice, Firefox, VLC. If someone doesn't like the software he's using already, or he's having license or price issues, he can just use Google. That's stuff that was meaningful in the 90s. And if the person in question hasn't heard of open source, why or how will he get to download this thing? It's one thing spreading the word, and quite another posting about something like this on a site like Slashdot. I mean, why is it news-worthy, in Slashdot of all places?

That would be news if there distrowatch wasn't around. Maybe.