Ruby is better than Assembly

Take two systems A and B.  A and B are identical excepting that B has a CPU that is twice as fast.

The benefits that a Ruby program running on B get vs running on A outweigh the benefits that an Assembly program running on B get vs running on A.  That is to say that Ruby receives a greater marginal utility in the change to a faster system than Assembly.

Since A and B are identical excepting their clock speed, writing a Ruby program for one takes the same amount off time and effort as it does for the other.  The same is true for Assembly.

Assembly takes more time and effort to code in than Ruby.

Computers get faster over time.  Therefore, Ruby will get better than Assembly will over time.

In addition, Assembly can't get much faster, but Ruby can and will.

Further, one can only do so much work, as there is only so much work to do.  Consider the following.  One spends a month writing a program that runs for 1 week.  Or they spend one week writing a program that runs for 6 months.  But the programmer's services aren't needed again for 1 year.  Surely they should opt to spend 1 week coding.

On the other hand, a certain amount of work needs to get done.  And Ruby is doing enough work in various domains.