> But I don't think you can limit people's wealth and not call it communism.

In communism, an individual can not own any means of production - effectively 0% of the society's total capital. I don't think it follows that any non-communist system must permit any single individual to gain up to 100% of the society's wealth.

I don't know what the limit could look like or how to make it work, but societies commonly called capitalist already implement various brakes on free trade, from regulation to capital and immigration controls, subsidies, tariffs...

I wrote blitters in assembly back in those days for my teenager hobby games. When I could actually target the 386 with its dword moves, it felt blisteringly fast. Maybe the 386 didn't run 286 code much faster but I recall the chip being one of the most mind-blowing target machine upgrades I experienced. Much later I recall the FPU-supported quadword copy in 486dx and of course P6 meeting MMX in Pentium II. Good times.

Crypto has become the ultimate swamp asset

C++ monomorphises generics on demand too. That's why it can have errors specific to specialization and why template error messages spam long causal chains.

C++ compile times are due to headers. Which in case of templates result in a lot of redundant work then deduplicated by the linker.

In my mind Clojure is Lispy, Python is not, nor is Javascript.

In addition to REPL and macros, I think two other Lispy features are essential:

nil is not just the sad path poison value that makes everything explode: lisp is written so that optionals compose well.

Speaking of composing, Lisps tend to be amazing with regard to composability. This is another line that cuts between CL, Scheme and Clojure on one side, with Python and Javascript firmly on the other side in my experience.

Lisps are as dynamic a languages ever go, unapologetically.