Comments on: Evolutionary Capacity: Why organisms cannot be like machines http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/ The Trajectory of Technology Mon, 21 May 2012 05:21:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Evolution: The concept and how we talk about it http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-2491 Evolution: The concept and how we talk about it Sun, 03 Jan 2010 09:37:01 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-2491 [...] Evolutionary Capacity: Why organisms cannot be like machines [...] [...] Evolutionary Capacity: Why organisms cannot be like machines [...]

]]> By: Great Science, Great Scientists, and Icons http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-2185 Great Science, Great Scientists, and Icons Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:17:11 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-2185 [...] Evolutionary Capacity: Why organisms cannot be like machines [...] [...] Evolutionary Capacity: Why organisms cannot be like machines [...]

]]> By: Gus K. http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-1543 Gus K. Sat, 15 Aug 2009 02:49:52 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-1543 Dr. Drexler: Your paper reminded me of unrelated work by Elizer Yudkowsky and the Singularity Institute who argue, in essence, that engineered intelligent systems can self evolve into out of control systems of high intelligence. While this is not directly related to your recent paper. I was wondering if you could briefly comment on their work. Dr. Drexler:

Your paper reminded me of unrelated work by Elizer Yudkowsky and the Singularity Institute who argue, in essence, that engineered intelligent systems can self evolve into out of control systems of high intelligence.

While this is not directly related to your recent paper. I was wondering if you could briefly comment on their work.

]]> By: Organic vs Inorganic Systems « S.O.S http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-1492 Organic vs Inorganic Systems « S.O.S Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:58:36 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-1492 [...] Drexler has a post up, referencing his 89 paper, where he describes the differences between the products of design, and [...] [...] Drexler has a post up, referencing his 89 paper, where he describes the differences between the products of design, and [...]

]]> By: Eric Drexler http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-1447 Eric Drexler Sat, 08 Aug 2009 22:32:07 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-1447 @ Darius Bacon -- That looks like an interesting paper. Back in my MIT days, Gerald Sussman was on my doctoral committee, so maybe I’d better read it, too. (Re. the OCR errors, thanks for the help. I think these have been fixed.) @ Darius Bacon — That looks like an interesting paper. Back in my MIT days, Gerald Sussman was on my doctoral committee, so maybe I’d better read it, too.

(Re. the OCR errors, thanks for the help. I think these have been fixed.)

]]> By: Darius Bacon http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-1393 Darius Bacon Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:25:25 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-1393 It should be interesting to compare this to Gerald Sussman's more recent essay http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/gjs/6.945/readings/robust-systems.pdf on building what you call O-style software systems. I noticed a bunch of OCR errors in my first pass through: <div style="font-size:0.7em; color: #999;">Parts have definite sizes, shapes, amid positions with respect to one another. [presumably should be "and"] with a flange having a special shape arid a special pattern of bolt holes It is easy to get. some rough idea of time probabilities involved. In modern digital systems (which cant incorporate error-correcting codes) error rates in fact can be made arbitrarily how through redundancy such as continuity of skit, amid vascularization time characteristics of O-style systems ["the"] does not enable all imaginable evolutionary steps, hunt only some Among time prohibited steps [actually, just search the whole page for "time"] vertebrate retinas have their neural wiring mm front of their photosensors the sensible structure, with time wiring behind. Why hasn’t. evolution flipped time vertebrate retina? by introducing a new piece in the structure, Finally, ideas are typically adaptive, taking a form that depends on their relationships to other ideas, Design concepts Inn considering the evolution of the protein machinery of modern cells, bacterial numbers and generation times are relevant,, since bacteria dominated the bio sphere for of years and eukaryotes are relatively recent. it seems that the hatter would be a distinct and challenging goal nanoreplicators will hue designed the hatter will be shaped not designed,, they are not necessarily structured in a way that lends itself to understanding Processes from scratch, Because it will he natural evolved to evolve, Nanoengineering artificial life will riot automatically be furthered </div> It should be interesting to compare this to Gerald Sussman’s more recent essay http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/gjs/6.945/readings/robust-systems.pdf on building what you call O-style software systems.

I noticed a bunch of OCR errors in my first pass through:

Parts have definite sizes, shapes, amid positions with respect to one another. [presumably should be "and"]
with a flange having a special shape arid a special pattern of bolt holes
It is easy to get. some rough idea of time probabilities involved.
In modern digital systems (which cant incorporate error-correcting codes)
error rates in fact can be made arbitrarily how through redundancy
such as continuity of skit, amid vascularization
time characteristics of O-style systems ["the"]
does not enable all imaginable evolutionary steps, hunt only some
Among time prohibited steps [actually, just search the whole page for "time"]
vertebrate retinas have their neural wiring mm front of their photosensors
the sensible structure, with time wiring behind. Why hasn’t. evolution flipped time vertebrate retina?
by introducing a new piece in the structure, Finally, ideas are typically adaptive, taking a form that depends on their relationships to other ideas, Design concepts
Inn considering the evolution of the protein machinery of modern cells, bacterial numbers and generation times are relevant,, since bacteria dominated the bio sphere for of years and eukaryotes are relatively recent.
it seems that the hatter would be a distinct and challenging goal
nanoreplicators will hue designed
the hatter will be shaped
not designed,, they are not necessarily structured in a way that lends itself to understanding Processes
from scratch, Because
it will he natural
evolved to evolve, Nanoengineering
artificial life will riot automatically be furthered
]]> By: the Foresight Institute » Self-replicating machines and risk http://metamodern.com/2009/08/02/contrasts-in-evolutionary-capacity/comment-page-1/#comment-1389 the Foresight Institute » Self-replicating machines and risk Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:01:41 +0000 http://metamodern.com/?p=4555#comment-1389 [...] and analysis in the field of SRMs is unusual in many ways.  Eric Drexler has posted a paper about differences in evolutionary capacity in mechanical and biological systems that’s worth [...] [...] and analysis in the field of SRMs is unusual in many ways.  Eric Drexler has posted a paper about differences in evolutionary capacity in mechanical and biological systems that’s worth [...]

]]>