Does this article put forward an assumption that the Lisp is less abstract than "Turing machines"? If so, I'd like someone to explain to me how, because this article confused me completely. And it's the fourth time I read this thing today. lm? Other CS mofos? ;)
Arse shelter/background: Yes, I know who's Alan Kay. I'm not questioning his authority or contributions, just don't get what he's on about. My own experience with Lisp can be boiled down to "finished this thing and remained indifferent". I'm no expert and know it, but I'm also extremely sceptical about stuff proclaimed by Lispers.