----- Original Message ----- From: anthony cagle <acagle / subimo.com> To: ruby-talk ML <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 5:07 AM Subject: [ruby-talk:10779] Re: Suggestion for threading model > If you're referring to the CYC project, it spun out as a company, Cycorp > which appears to still be operational (www.cyc.com). > Thanks very much for that reference, Anthony... that does indeed seem to be what I was remembering... Hal > -----Original Message----- > From: Hal E. Fulton [mailto:hal9000 / hypermetrics.com] > Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2001 4:24 PM > To: ruby-talk ML > Subject: [ruby-talk:10711] Re: Suggestion for threading model > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stephen White <spwhite / chariot.net.au> > To: ruby-talk ML <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org> > Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2001 10:12 AM > Subject: [ruby-talk:10708] Suggestion for threading model > > > [huge interesting snip] > > Here's my (mostly useless) opinion. > > In terms of modeling the universe, this might be a very > interesting, useful approach. After all, every object in > the real world has its own "world line" and there is no > inherent "sequence" in accessing them. > > As long as we're dreaming, I'd assign a separate > processor to each object instance. And the instances > wouldn't share any code among them. > > The universe implements True Concurrency in possibly the > strictest sense of the word... probably without even a > quantized timeslice... and there is no evidence that God > does timeslicing anyway... :) > > So in a sense I like this idea (more long term than short). > > However, in terms of practicality and ease of implementation, > I think there might be huge problems. > > To exaggerate a notch or three, it's rather like the idea of > building a giant expert system with millions of rules, giving it > a natural language interface, and slowly dumping all of human > knowledge into it. (Things like this have been proposed > seriously.) > > To all who propose these things, I say, "Fine... go do it." > > I recall an interesting 2,000,000-rule expert system proposed > right here in Austin at MCC... but I haven't heard from it in > so many years, I'd bet a nickel it's defunct. > > Hal Fulton > >