On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 09:54:35 -0500, "Paul D. Fernhout"
<pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:

> There is some sort of mismatch going on here between the mind and 
> Smalltalk's object model. What it is in its entirety I am not sure. But 
> clearly the tools at hand in Smalltalk-80 can't match the minds 
> flexibility in object-oriented (and other) modeling. Yet it is very much a 
> stated design goal in Dan's original paper to have the Smalltalk software 
> environment be a good match for how the mind actually works. So, here, as 
> exemplified by humor, we have a mismatch. Essentially, Smalltalk code 
> isn't funny. :-)

I'm working on some serious AI research right now, using Squeak (of
course). My idea of the brain (in terms of how we model it) is a virtual
machine, with very little Smalltalk code, and huge amounts of data that
gets stored and indexed. You can't model things like humor and emotions and
such in code - it gets modeled in data.

http://www.bioloid.info/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=MicroRaptor if anyone is
interested...

Later,
Jon

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Jon Hylands      Jon at huv.com      http://www.huv.com/jon

  Project: Micro Raptor (Small Biped Velociraptor Robot)
           http://www.huv.com/blog