> It was intended to be a systems language to replace C++
More specifically, it was intended to replace the systems that Google wrote in C++ (read: servers). Early on, the Go team expressed happy surprise that people found utility in the language outside of that niche.
> but has instead pivoted to be a "cloud language"
I'm not sure that is really a pivot. At the heart of all the "cloud" tools it is known for is a HTTP server which serves as the basis of the control protocol, among other things. Presumably Go was chosen exactly because of it being designed for building servers. Maybe someone thought there would be more CRUD servers written in it too, but these "cloud" tools are ultimately in the same vein, not an entirely different direction.
> or a replacement for Python
I don't think you'd normally choose Go to train your ML/AI model. It has really only gunned for Python in the server realm; the very thing it was intended to be for. What was surprising to those living in an insular bubble at Google was that the rest of the world wrote their servers in Python and Ruby rather than C++ like Google – so it being picked up by the Python and Ruby crowd was unexpected to them – but not to anyone else.
> I don't think you'd normally choose Go to train your ML/AI model. It has really only gunned for Python in the server realm
I don't think anyone ever claimed Golang will displace Python in the ML area. But in a world where Golang and Elixir exist (two languages with stacks that make starting a new web / API projects extremely easy, almost trivial), not to mention old-timers like Ruby, the amount of people reaching for Python for web / API projects is depressingly high. "Sunk cost fallacy", "one-trick pony", "Stockholm syndrome" and a few others come to mind when thinking about the programmers doing it.