<i>Simple in the sense that there should be a small number of basic
principles, if these are right then the language will be powerful but easy
to comprehend and use. Small is good. This we managed to do.</i> - this is what packer&#x27;s mindset would never understand. Nature doesn&#x27;t work the way they think Java should.<p>This, by the way, is the universal principle. As simple as possible, but right. People who studied viruses and molecular biology in general would understand.<p>The protein expression&#x2F;DNA repair machinery is where one should look for insights. That world is everything-is-a-firstclass, pure-functional, strongly but dynamically typed (everything has its unique structure, which could be used as a type-tag) and even duck-typed (if something binds to a receptor it triggers an action), loosely coupled, asynchronous, timeless.<p>It should be easy to model cells and even organs in Erlang because it has been based on the right smallest possible set of basic principles, or, at least, close to it.<p>MIT Scheme sub-culture also has great insights about putting the right principles first. So were Smalltalk or Plan9 guys.