I think it's because (a) it's become a lot easier to create languages and (b) we're stuck. I am hoping (a) is straightforward. For (b), I think most of us sen

I think it's because (a) it's become a lot easier to create languages and (b) we're stuck. I am hoping (a) is straightforward. For (b), I think most of us sense at least intuitively, with different strengths, that our current crop of programming languages are not really good enough. Too low-level, too difficult to get to a more compact and meaningful representation. LLMs have kinda demonstrated the source for this feeling of unease, by generating quite a bit of code from fairly short natural language instructions. The information density of that generated code can't really be all that high, can it now? So we have this issue with expressiveness, but we lack the insight required to make substantial progress. So we bounce around along the well-trodden paths of language design, hoping for progress that refuses to materialize.