Is that true though, you can't define a generic monadic interface yes but you can implement the same interface for your data types.
That makes it less useful as the post says but still pretty powerful in some cases
For me it is indeed the latter. I can glean a lot of interesting stuff from other languages as long as they look a bit familiar. Haskell I usually come to a dead stop pretty quickly.
I've tried to read up on some Haskell basics, but the main issue is I don't have any real incentive to use Haskell, I have other hobbies that are more tempting, so I forget pretty quick.
The Java-ish version of the Functor interface for instance was quite readable to me, ugly or not.
I agree with you entirely that the Haskell syntax is probably one of the biggest issues with monads being approachable.