note my non-anonymity

You call mujadaddy non-anonymity? Your gonads are the same size as an electron and you know it. LOL.

LOL. I get this a lot. It's better to be a kook than an ass kisser any time. Are there any people with gonads left in science? Or more to the point, are there any gonads on Slashdot?

If you got any gonads, identify yourself. :-D

You want science to be popular? Just stop the elitist condescension and admit that you don't know it all and that you (especially, the more famous scientists) may be wrong about many things. The public has the right to mistrust scientists just as much as the religious leaders. We don't like to be preached to from on high. We want respect.

As an example, if you ask a physicist to explain why two particles in relative motion remain in motion, you come face to face with bullshit and ignorance. One may tell you that nothing is needed (the magical unseen cosmic hand) while the other may insist that physics is not about the why but the how of things. To a thinking layperson, both answers are pathetically wrong. Learn about why an analysis of the causality of motion leads to the conclusion that we are swimming in an immense sea of energetic particles.

Physics: The Problem With Motion

My theory is that some Mexican or Columbian drug cartel needed a safe way to retrieve bundles of dope dropped off the coast of Florida and floating right below the surface of the water. What (who?) would be better suited for the job than Waldo? I'm sure Waldo is sporting a new black coating by now.

Submarine folks should know better than naming their craft any name other than Nemo. Serves them right. Besides, Waldo is probably a code name for a cocaine mule in that part of the country.

It just goes to show ya. If it's not one thing, it's another.

Ha ha. Old timer. Played with Fortran or COBOL lately?

Doctors should try their own medicine, IMO. I dismiss those who dismiss me. That is all.

I'm just an idea man. If my ideas are good, others will act on them and they do. There are several people working on implementing their own a COSA interpreters and associated user interfaces. Currently, I don't have the time to develop code. Besides, I am really interested in the hardware aspect of the model.

Also, it is not as if I am twisting anybody's arm to read my stuff. My motto is, love it or leave it.

Opinions, opinions, opinions. See ya.

As they say, opinions are a dime a dozen.

Compared to how easy it could be if it were done right? Yes. At any rate, since you are so happy with yourself, I won't feel sorry for you when you'll lose your programming job five or ten years from now, just because your services are no longer needed. By anybody.

It's all done with sensors and effectors.

I see your points but I think you should read Parallel Computing: Why the Future is Compositional... and hierarchical... and non-algorithmic... and deterministic... etc.

And while you're at it, you might as well read How to Solve the Parallel Programming Crisis. Without multithreading, of course, since multithreading is the biggest and most hideous abomination of them all.

Funny. In my opinion, Labview, too, is an abomination. A truly compositional programming environment should be based strictly on a hierarchical tree. That is to say, the program should look like a tree and should be a branch in the universal tree of all software applications.