There have been many variations on these "Laws", which are really observations of existing practice and behavior.
For example, "Proebsting's Law", which asserts that compiler optimizations have yielded annual performance gains an order of magnitude worse than hardware performance gains and "Proebsting's Paradox", which is an unexpected result in a provably optimal gambling strategy.(See Wikipedia for details.) [adapted from proebsting.cs.arizona.edu/]
I remember watching a video of Grace Hopper giving a speech on how less is more in code because memory is limited. This was about COBOL and the mainframes that used wrie wraps for core memory. Captain Hopper had a wrist band made out of decommissioned wire wrap and said see how much memory you are wasting?
Modern programming languages and Pcs have gotten rid of pointers and garbage collection etc, and Pcs run faster and have more RAM. This happened around 2001 to 2002 when super debuggers who reduced code were no longer wanted as they got 500 plus resumes a week for my job. I fixed memory leaks, closed off data record objects and freed up object memory when it was done. They no longer cared about that and measure how good a job is done by lines of code rather than good quality code that runs faster, does not have memory leaks, and gets more done in fewer CPU cycles and less memory that the Bloated programs that don't have all those things.
I can write a C program using the command line and text that will run faster than a GUI program with bells and whistles due to feature creep.
For example, "Proebsting's Law", which asserts that compiler optimizations have yielded annual performance gains an order of magnitude worse than hardware performance gains and "Proebsting's Paradox", which is an unexpected result in a provably optimal gambling strategy.(See Wikipedia for details.) [adapted from proebsting.cs.arizona.edu/]