Python software simply rots while you're not watching it. Either you make it a full time occupation, every time some library gets an 'upgrade' (with a ton of breaking changes) you get to rewrite your code, sometimes in non-obvious and intrusive ways. And every time the language changes in some breaking way you get to spend (lots of) time on debugging hard to track down problems because the codebases they occur in are large enough to mask the problems that would have come out if the same situation had occurred during development.
And that's before we get into the various ways in which python versions and library versions can interfere with each other. You couldn't have made a much bigger mess if you tried. And I actually like the core language. But so many projects I wrote in python just stopped working. I remember having a pretty critical chunk of pygame code written for a CAD system that just stopped working after an upgrade and there was no way it was ever going to run again without rewriting it. That's the sort of thing that really puts me of an I remember it long after. Machine learning code is still so much in flux that it doesn't matter. But hardware abstraction layers such as pygame should be long lived and stable between versions. And that really is just one example.
Anyway, I think asking 'That other languages don't' doesn't really matter. But Haskell (see TFA) is one language that always tried hard not to be successful so breaking changes would be permitted (which is fair). Python tries both to be popular and to allow for major stuff to be broken every now and then and that is very rough on those that have large codebases in production.
By contrast, COBOL, FORTRAN, LISP, ERLANG, C and C++ code from ages ago still compiles, maybe you'll have to set a flag or two but they're pretty careful about stuff like that.