It must be evident at this late juncture, Chancellor Yarvin, a full half decade since your Durdenesque doppelganger deemed the denizens of earth prepared for his prolix proclamation of Martian supremacy, that the more Carlylean your Urbit apologetics, the deeper your detractors' disposition for derisory dismissal of your loving labors as the grandiloquent, malformed products of, inter alia, luddite nostalgia for the apocryphal elegance of antediluvian computing, a nocturnal-emission inducing fetish for a fascist technocratic telos, viz automation of global autocracy, or a perniciously persuasive strain of neo-Swiftian satire, which advocates Kafkaesque madness with Kaufmanesque earnestness.

That confuses the hell out of me, because I think your plan is brilliant. What gives, broseph?

My only formal CS-education was at summer camp learning Logo when I was nine. In my early 20s, I taught myself LISP from PG's book purely so I could start wasting a few weekends a year coding an urGAI. The first practical coding I've ever done was this year, when I finally bit the bullet and learned Python and Java.

Is your vision convincing to me because I'm clueless about the harsh realities of programming useful things? Or am I able to discern its splendor because I avoided exposure to the false conventional wisdom that blinds other coders to your insights?

If you put a gun to my head, I'd have to pick door number one. Actually, if you put a gun to my head I'd say Urbit was the best thing since Filmer and then apologize for that over-the-top pastiche. But you see my dilemma.

[Edit: Serious question. You came up with Watt/Hoon 5+ years ago, and you claim it's not much harder to use than Lisp. If that's true, where is all the useful Hoon-coded software?

If I gave you five years to write things in Lisp, you could produce an incredible library of offerings... No?]