> they could not post success stories It feels like Lisp and Open Source are old enough this should not be a relevant concern anymore. Many newer Lisps exist t

> they could not post success stories It feels like Lisp and Open Source are old enough this should not be a relevant concern anymore. Many newer Lisps exist that have been OSS their whole lives, including the community infrastructure. What remains are the inherent properties of the language instead of any legal artifacts. That is a great set of responses to the Lisp Curse article. Again I will note that my points are not about Lisp as I'm just taking that article as granted (which it turns out it's not, but still). The point about the pareto principle is also language-agnostic, and an interesting point. It's sort of a proof that the 80% problem is going to persist to some extent even if you do use many dependencies. (Note not to the fullest extent — the 80% problem can at least be mitigated by everyone not reimplementing everything every time.)