I think The issue with this discussion stems from the usage of the word "Language". We are discussing this topic (as any) through a lense, that lense being: "what defines a language?". But we are defining a language incorrectly (I think). Many have taken to the dictionary definition and argued the need for grammar and constructs. I feel in this case such things are arbitray and invented by humans for human language. Binary is certainly not a HUMAN Language, on this we can all agree. But the computer only requires such things(grammar, syntax etc) as and when it has been told to demand them like in the IDE's for T-SQL or C#. The real question then is not if binary is a Human language according to the dictionary, but rather the question should be: "Is it possible to enter an instruction to a computer in the form of binary, and have the computer then use this instruction to perform an expected result?". IF the answer is yes, then it is indeed a computer language if the answer is no, then it is not a language at all but merely a medium. In any case it is important to draw the distinction between how people communicate and how computers communicate, and not confuse the two. So, what say you now? :)