<div dir="ltr">It's a subject I've thought a lot about. Somewhere about halfway through it, there's a little simulation. It made me think a bit of the classic EToys experiment with epidemiology (the bit with all the green bouncing atoms turning red when they bump into red ones, starting with a red one and a bunch of green ones.)<div>
<br></div><div>As I looked at it, I thought: boy, that sure looks a lot like it was done using Squeak. And a slightly earlier version, too, to my eye. Something about the font and the absence of very much left padding in the text box seemed to smack of Squeak. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Anyway, it could be worth watching generally, but really I'm just curious, and if there's a single human quality which I can identify in myself that I'm genuinely proud of, it's the boundless curiosity. Does anyone here know the author of this talk? The demonstration could have been implemented with anything, but if it was Squeak, it would be a hell of a lot of fun to vivisect the thing. Okay, lousy metaphor. Hopefully people can tell what I'm trying to say though; obviously I'm not the sort that cuts a mouse open while it's still alive (though I have a terrible habit of saying things that are likely to greatly upset it, so much so that I'll feel horrible about myself later, even if it felt fantastic to say at the time.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>I think this little TED talk really speaks -- in a sort of subtext -- to the liberating power of simulation. So to Squeak or not to Squeak, either way it's interesting and (I think) relevant to at least part of the community.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Thanks again for the perspective, folks,</div><div><br></div><div>C</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_goldstein_the_battle_between_your_present_and_future_self">http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_goldstein_the_battle_between_your_present_and_future_self</a><br>
</div></div>