The opinions expressed in this blog post are one of those uninteresting, infinitely parroted idioms that people like to assert to seem smart and pragmatic, but

The opinions expressed in this blog post are one of those uninteresting, infinitely parroted idioms that people like to assert to seem smart and pragmatic, but are completely idiotic upon further reflection. It's similar to "If you rent you are throwing your money away" completely ignoring the realities of how DUMB that statement is. Paying for a house which you must mortgage, pay taxes on, and maintain, but cannot rent out or sell is much more expensive than renting someone else's house, and historically the stock market gives greater yields for many investors. First of all, we have not yet written the perfect programming language, and every single language written has pros and cons for various different tasks. Choosing the right language can lead to writing abstractions that make you ABSURDLY more productive than alternative choices. Write RabbitMQ in Javascript instead of Erlang and tell me we only need one language to rule them all. Off the top of my head, I can think of 5 languages that have MASSIVELY improved the software ecosystem over the last 10 years: Golang, Rust, Elixir, Typescript, Elm. > However, I hope people consider carefully the social costs of creating a new programming language especially if it becomes popular, and understand that in some cases creating a popular new language could actually be irresponsible. Unsurprising a self-proclaimed christian programmer takes the moral high ground, and asserts writing a new programming language out of passion, love, or an actual need for a new language to allow for cleaner abstractions for your particular use case can POSSIBLY be unethical. I have a different suggestion: Consider the social costs of parroting idiotic drivel you heard one time and trying to pass it off as actually interesting insight.