Melody, a researcher in cognitive science at Stanford, has posted a detailed discussion of the problems with Chomsky's famed povery of the stimulus argument from the perspective of the last 40 years of computational learning models. Hindsight is always 20-20 right?
....there are at least two goals of modeling in cognitive science : 1) to discover the best computational method of accounting for a given phenomena, 2) to discover the best account that is also psychologically plausible. The goal has never been to rule out a whole class of models on the basis of one ill-starred example. Because — quite frankly — models don’t deal in ‘logical possibilities.’ They are not mathematical or logical proofs. Step 3 in Miller and Chomsky’s paper is a pseudo-scientific non sequitur.
The whole post is well worth reading.