"Why do dynamic languages make it difficult to maintain large codebases?"

Some of you have probably read it already (and to some of you it's just preaching to the choir), but I commend this article from Ars Technica, describing quite calmly the reasons why typical "dynamic" languages are poorly-suited to large-scale programming. It's not quite the way I would have put it (I would hammer even harder on the point that dynamic programs are relatively easy to write, but hard to maintain), but I this it hits most of the important points. And the author has deep enough experience with a wide enough range of languages to seriously know what he's talking about...