Well, it's agreeing that Julia's goals (promises? aspirations?) are worthwhile. Whether Julia itself actually delivers on those promises is a different question that isn't addressed in the original post.
I like what Julia is doing but I just dislike the syntax. It seems to resemble ruby, whose syntax I also think is ugly, which to me resembles a modern form of basic.
There is the use of @ (but to signal macros), but otherwise, the syntax is much closer to a cross between Python and matlab except nicer for doing math.
I tried writing a few programs in Julia and got sucked in by how effective it is. The real surprise is that just a few weeks in instead of pulling up R to do a quick calculation my fingers decided they wanted Julia.
Does it really matter though? I mean, whether it's a closing bracket or a whitespace demarcated control flow - does it really effect anything you do in the language? Julia solves a lot of problems, like real problems - quibbling over begin/end vs {/} or white space seems kinda silly.
Meanwhile I have actually seen real world lost productivity due to white space in python. Curly brackets not so much. Never seen lost productivity over begin/end but I'm sure it's happened. It seems silly to me either way - it doesn't really effect anything.
It's probably more fair to claim that R/Python/Julia have the same ecosystem now if you are willing to deal with speed bumps and some clunky interfaces. Because there are packages going in both direction for all three.