Earlier quoted context omitted.
People tend to think of genetic code as a sort of assembly language which is very verbose, but I wonder if the correct way to view it is in fact a very terse domain-specific language, because it actually depends on the entire complex machinery of the cell to be present in order to work, which in itself contains a lot of information?
Yes. Another important metaphor is that the common idea of DNA as blueprints is entirely wrong. It's not blueprints, it's a recipe. A blueprint describes what something is. A recipe describes the steps needed to make something, making use of a lot of complex existing machinery and parts with only a reference to them.
The nucleotide sequence is obviously important, but people also sometimes forget that DNA and RNA are real things with 3D structure too. That matters too: it’s as if builders make errors where the blueprint rolls up or pages stick together.
The whole thing is absolutely fascinating and wild.