>>3 I don't disagree that:
A computer which returns obviously incorrect results is useless, and one which returns subtly incorrect results is worse than useless.
I don't disagree with that, I just mainly disagree with the notion that Unix users are somehow at fault for a series of profit-driven decisions the companies that make Lisp Machines made in the past and continue to make. It is no unix users fault that the tech to make a Lisp chip and the software to run on it don't exist. Why not be mad at Paul Graham, say, who uses all his Y-combinator money to talk about how great CL is, then add another dialect of Lisp, then another, when he could be working on (or finding the people to work on) the LM equivalent of RISC-V. I mean it's only 10 years old and already you can get development boards from SiFive or Seeed (or probably others).