Didn't one of the Elbrus CPUs have an x86 translation layer in hardware? Trying to get that to execute code at reasonable speeds, Transmeta style, to use as a replacement to western-supplied hardware wherever you have an explicit need for x86 wouldn't sound particularly far-fetched to me, if I didn't know so little about what's going on within Russia.
Seems to be this[1] guy, which you can find out by skulking around an older snapshot of his website from the Wayback Machine, where he displayed his real name within the footer on every page, and went by a slightly different username up to seemingly as late as April this year. Maybe a rather poor attempt at dissociating his real identity from the website somehow? (on second thought, he still links to the webpage from his GitHub profile, so that wouldn't make much sense, I think. Hmm.)
9front, seemingly Plan 9's de-facto successor, is almost surely quirky, often whimsical, at times nostalgic. It might even be functional, depending on how you define that[1]. Is actively developed, has a vibrant community. Puts an interesting spin on how you lay out systems, but doesn't diverge much from the Bell Labs formula. I'd certainly recommend giving it a shot, for the UNIX-inclined.
[1] I've daily driven it back in high-school, for all that's worth. Wrote assignments in troff and all. Some people might be able to tell of less mundane success stories as well.
Not entirely on topic, but it is such a pleasant touch to see the titles for the properties displayed before the shell all lining up just by word choice alone. I've seen people who pad out code comments like that; it has this rather capricious, sculpture-like feeling to it.
I think one of the reasons recursion is often emphasized in relation to Lisp is because one of Lisp's core data structures, the linked list, can be defined inductively, and thus lends itself well to transformations expressed recursively (since they follow the structure of the data to the letter). But recursion in itself isn't something particularly special. Though it is more general than loops, and so it is nice to have some grasp on it, and how looping and iteration relate to each other, and it is often easier to reason about a problem in terms of a base case and a recursive case rather than a loop, at a higher level you will usually come to find bare recursion mostly counterproductive. You want to abstract it out, such that you can then compose your data transformations out of higher level operations which you can pick and match at will, APL-style. Think reductions, onto which you build mappings and filters and groupings and scans and whichever odd transformations one could devise, at which point recursion isn't much more than an implementation detail. This is about collections, but anything inductive would follow a similar pattern. Most functional languages will edge you towards the latter, and I find Lisp won't particularly, unless you actively seek it out (though Clojure encourages it most explicitly, if you consider that a Lisp).
>the pleasantness of being able to get 'inside' the program
Indeed, that's one of the things makes Common Lisp in specific particularly great (and it is something other contemporary dialects seem to miss, to varying degrees). It lets you sit within your program and sculpt it from the inside, in a Smalltalk sort of way, and the whole language is designed towards that. Pervasive late-binding means redefining mostly anything takes effect pretty much immediately, not having to bother recompiling or reloading anything else depending on it. The object system specifies things such as class redefinitions and instance morphing and dependencies and so on, such that you can start with a simple class definition, then go on to to interactively add or remove slots, or play with the inheritance chain, and have all of the existing instances just do the right thing, most of the time. Many provided functions that let you poke and prod the state of your image don't make much sense outside of an interactive environment.
There is a point to be made about abstraction, maths, and giving instructions to silicon (and metaprogramming!), but I'll have to pass for now. I apologize if this is too rambly, I tend to get verbose when tired.
"If a revolution destroys a systematic government, but the systematic patterns of thought that produced that government are left intact, then those patterns will repeat themselves in the succeeding government." - Robert Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
Though I don't know enough about Chinese politics to tell how much the quote actually fits.
Reminds me, some fortunes on LAMBDA.TXT[1] seem to hint at the existence of an "Alice's LispM", seemingly a parody on the PDP-10 version, but a quick search for it doesn't seem to come up with much (I haven't looked very hard). Does anybody know anything about this?