What’s the message here? I read and read a lot of words but nothing clear came through. Maybe he sort of seems to be saying that Ruby is special in modern programming with LLMs? That doesn’t ring true for me - seems that languages are less special and less differentiated than ever with LLMs, which is to say that languages just tend to be less important now and that’s a good thing. Who cares about language, just build the thing.

Is he saying that Ruby is better for LLM programming? That’s hard to imagine because strong typing has to be a big help for automated programming tools and Ruby is behind all the other modern languages on typing.

Not really Ruby per se, but Extreme Programming, TDD, and all of the mid-2000s OO-hipster methodology stuff that accompanied Ruby/Rails back in the day. His thesis is that if you just adopt XP, like you're supposed to, that translates smoothly to programming with LLMs because you can have the LLMs fearlessly take incremental steps, supported by extensive testing, and directly oversee the work exactly the same way you would do pair-programming with a human junior programmer.