4 ms·

Because evolution is random, and not directed. 10x efficiency is what you get when you really have a designer.

by DougWebb 10y ago

sitkack 10y ago
And a single fitness function, not an environment.
- crazypyro 10y ago
  Small nitpick, but you can have a 'single fitness function' represent an entire environment. That's the entire concept of a fitness function: to simplify the merit of solution within an complex environment (or set of constraints/inputs/etc.) into a single figure. Obviously nature has a much complex fitness function than the efficiency of this one CO2 process. I think its more correct to say a "simpler fitness function".
  - sitkack 10y ago
    Correct, I should have said, "single dimension fitness function"
    - lisper 10y ago
      Actually, there is only one evolutionary fitness function, and that is reproductive fitness. The environment is the only variable. If your environment contains an intelligent agent that values the production of (say) alcohol, and the power to influence the selection of alcohol-producting organisms then an organism that produces alcohol can thrive. But this is true of anything, not just alcohol. Substitute "kitten photos" (or anything else) for "alcohol" and you will still have a true statement.
smt88 10y ago
Evolution isn't designed, but it also isn't random. It's just directed by survival, which isn't always best served by maximum efficiency in specific functions like this one.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- bluesroo 10y ago
  I think what he meant was that each individual mutation is random. There isn't someone intelligently deciding what the next batch of mutations should look like.
- DougWebb 10y ago
  Evolutionary changes occur by random mutation and, in sexual reproduction, by random genetic mixing. Whether or not those changes are successful is governed by survival, but it's not directed by survival. Survival doesn't choose specific evolutionary changes with a goal of increasing survivability.
  - smt88 10y ago
    This has become a completely semantic argument, but HN is a great place to argue semantics, so here we go. > Evolutionary changes occur by random mutation and, in sexual reproduction, by random genetic mixing The genetic changes of evolution are due to random mutation, but the ones that don't survive are not "evolution". Evolution is the subset of random mutations that increase reproduction/survival rates. If, at some point, a chimp was born with two heads, we wouldn't say that "chimps evolved to have two heads" because that two-headed chimp didn't pass on its genes. We'd say "a chimp randomly had two heads one time" and wouldn't bring it up in a discussion of evolution at all. > governed by survival, but it's not directed by survival To be directed by something does not always imply intentionality. Of course the most common usage of "direct" indicates something intentional, but that wasn't how I meant it. I meant "direct" in the sense that a particular landscape will direct the course of a river.

Because evolution is random, and not directed. 10x efficiency is what you get when you really have a designer.

sitkack 10y ago

And a single fitness function, not an environment.

crazypyro 10y ago
Small nitpick, but you can have a 'single fitness function' represent an entire environment. That's the entire concept of a fitness function: to simplify the merit of solution within an complex environment (or set of constraints/inputs/etc.) into a single figure. Obviously nature has a much complex fitness function than the efficiency of this one CO2 process. I think its more correct to say a "simpler fitness function".
- sitkack 10y ago
  Correct, I should have said, "single dimension fitness function"
  - lisper 10y ago
    Actually, there is only one evolutionary fitness function, and that is reproductive fitness. The environment is the only variable. If your environment contains an intelligent agent that values the production of (say) alcohol, and the power to influence the selection of alcohol-producting organisms then an organism that produces alcohol can thrive. But this is true of anything, not just alcohol. Substitute "kitten photos" (or anything else) for "alcohol" and you will still have a true statement.

smt88 10y ago

Evolution isn't designed, but it also isn't random. It's just directed by survival, which isn't always best served by maximum efficiency in specific functions like this one.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
bluesroo 10y ago
I think what he meant was that each individual mutation is random. There isn't someone intelligently deciding what the next batch of mutations should look like.
DougWebb 10y ago
Evolutionary changes occur by random mutation and, in sexual reproduction, by random genetic mixing. Whether or not those changes are successful is governed by survival, but it's not directed by survival. Survival doesn't choose specific evolutionary changes with a goal of increasing survivability.
- smt88 10y ago
  This has become a completely semantic argument, but HN is a great place to argue semantics, so here we go. > Evolutionary changes occur by random mutation and, in sexual reproduction, by random genetic mixing The genetic changes of evolution are due to random mutation, but the ones that don't survive are not "evolution". Evolution is the subset of random mutations that increase reproduction/survival rates. If, at some point, a chimp was born with two heads, we wouldn't say that "chimps evolved to have two heads" because that two-headed chimp didn't pass on its genes. We'd say "a chimp randomly had two heads one time" and wouldn't bring it up in a discussion of evolution at all. > governed by survival, but it's not directed by survival To be directed by something does not always imply intentionality. Of course the most common usage of "direct" indicates something intentional, but that wasn't how I meant it. I meant "direct" in the sense that a particular landscape will direct the course of a river.