Basically: Lisp projects have trouble scaling to larger teams (and communities) because of how fluid it is. That said, for a solo project or a small team, no language has more expressive power.
That said, Jonathan Blow has the occasional good opinion and a lot of really bad ones. His anti-abstraction zealotry is the basis of most of the bad ones. As another commenter here said, there are no universal truths when choosing a technology; it's always about using the right tool for the job.
But: 99% of software projects are made by solo devs or small teams, and shooting for scalability in its many dimensions from the outset has doomed many a project from making it out of the door. (Or hobbled them enough that the "happy problem" of scaling is never encountered)
Comments
Assuming performance isn't a problem (which it may well not be), this does a good job of laying out all the other arguments against Lisp: http://winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html
Basically: Lisp projects have trouble scaling to larger teams (and communities) because of how fluid it is. That said, for a solo project or a small team, no language has more expressive power.
That said, Jonathan Blow has the occasional good opinion and a lot of really bad ones. His anti-abstraction zealotry is the basis of most of the bad ones. As another commenter here said, there are no universal truths when choosing a technology; it's always about using the right tool for the job.
But: 99% of software projects are made by solo devs or small teams, and shooting for scalability in its many dimensions from the outset has doomed many a project from making it out of the door. (Or hobbled them enough that the "happy problem" of scaling is never encountered)