Code you can’t just throw away is a liability because you have to keep supporting it / servicing it. Claude Code and friends also change that part of the cost equation:

You might not get gcc/llvm level optimization from a newly built compiler - but if you had a home-built one, which took $15,000/month engineer to support (for years!) you can now get a new one for $20,000 every 3 months, for a 50% cost saving, each time changing your requirements (which you couldn’t do before).

Code used to be a liability, like a car or an apartment for the average person. Now it’s a liability, like a car or apartment for Bill Gates.

I would normally agree, but I think the "code is a liability" quote assumes that humans are reading and modifying the code. If AI tools are also reading and modifying their own code, is that still true?

>Code is a liability, not an asset

Then "AI" code is even more of a liability.

I think you mean to say, "code you don't understand is a liability, not an asset"

But please correct me if I'm wrong.