It sounds like a security nightmare and I'm not sure about how efficient it can be for not user oriented tasks. But the ubiquity of the system is like what XML pretended to be but never was.
Exploiting a non-networked machine isn't very useful. There's no practical way to get any data back, to use it as a bot worker, or to send spam, so what's the point?
It might have landed (either in closed beta or I don't have enough karma to do it). Or maybe it was simply revived by an admin...
In the past he made racist and homophobic remarks and got shadowbanned. His mental illness is hard to understand at times. The same thing happened to him on Reddit. He has to use multiple accounts to get around the shadowbans.
I think he is like Brandon Eich who donated to the wrong charity, made good contributions and solid programming work, but holds opinions that are not socially acceptable.
I'd take HolyC over Javascript any day.
I can't reply to you directly. I didn't mean to imply that TempleOS is not multiprocessing. From what I gather there is only one user (with multiple processes) and that user owns all the files, hence no file permissions that say "this file belongs to user X" and "this file belongs to user Y", only user X can read/write/execute X's files, and the same for user Y. The author of the article linked to here states that TempleOS is a single user (but multiprocess!) system.
I wonder why you haven't implemented threads? Not enough of a benefit in your opinion? Aren't threads supported by modern CPUs. Don't they allow faster context switching than switching context for processes? Though I guess Erlang disagrees!
What TempleOS calls “processes” is what you are used to calling “threads”.
You are currently shadow banned.