5 ms·

So if I understood well the concept, this type of amoeba is like an ASIC for traveling salesman problem. Interesting concept, to find bio-organisms that can be

So if I understood well the concept, this type of amoeba is like an ASIC for traveling salesman problem. Interesting concept, to find bio-organisms that can be used very efficentlly to "solve" a certain type of problem.

sano1 8y ago
Hopefully our spiritual and intellectual betters will start to leverage humans this way. The future is bright.
- oilfun 8y ago
  or just let people be themselves and stop trying to play god
  - ozzmotik 8y ago
    ive never heard a convincing argument for why it's necessarily a bad thing to "play god". it just seems like an oft repeated phrase that makes no sense to me and only survived because of some idea that we have no right to try and discern the true nature of the universe and then to control it in the pursuit of betterment of our capacities as a species.
    - vxxzy 8y ago
      I wouldn't necessarily say "playing god", but we do vaccinate ourselves right? I mean I think the real issue is inflicting a change to a being that will become "Sentient" or "Conscious". When we genetically alter that which has potential for "life", do we know, beyond a doubt, that the change we inflict will be positive for the individual AND positive our species as a whole? If we cannot say for certain, then genetically altering sentient life (who have no choice), is not a good idea.
    - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
      Because a lot of "playing god" is thinly veiled authoritarianism -- the desire to control our fellows, out of our own egotism?
      - mynameisvlad 8y ago
        That's not what the term is generally used for. Generally speaking, "playing god" is talked about as messing with nature and the things around us to better suit our needs. Genetic engineering, climate engineering, etc. "God" refers to the natural order of things and trying to change it.
    - adrianN 8y ago
      "Playing God" is often used for activities where we're able to cause some change, have a hard time undoing our actions, and are unable see all possible consequences.
frevd 8y ago
No, if I understood right, this thing is a quantum computer solving NP-complete problems in linear time. And the article claims to have a simulation doing the same, but they are not sure whether this is actually only a special case scenario.
- Filligree 8y ago
  It found a solution. Not an optimal solution.
  - frevd 8y ago
    Right, it is not guaranteed to find _the_ best solution possible, but at least it does find _some_ solution to NP-complete problems in linear time, which no classical algorithm is expected to be able to do. Now they claim in that article to have made a simulation of this running on a classical computer exhibiting the same characteristics, which frankly should not be possible. so where is the catch?
    - gus_massa 8y ago
      You can always find a solution to the TSP. All cities are connected with all cities, so you can travel the cities in the alphabetical order (or the order in list). It's (usually) a very bad solution that is much longer than the best solution. There are good heuristic, specially if the distances are not chosen at random but are the distance between points in the plane. So it's posible in some cases to find quite good solutions. The problem is NP-complete only is you ask for the best solution.
  - sano1 8y ago
    Similar to the way my NN (brain) can solve the TS problem by just guessing the best route. Sure that's <i>a</i> solution. edit:typo
    - whatshisface 8y ago
      On Hackernews you can use asterisks to produce italics, like in markdown.
grahamburger 8y ago
Next up: a self driving car initiative called 'horse-and-buggy' that is exactly what it sounds like.
- _ooqq 8y ago
  They've been mastering the latter for a while now; the "buggy" part. :D

sano1 8y ago

Hopefully our spiritual and intellectual betters will start to leverage humans this way. The future is bright.

oilfun 8y ago
or just let people be themselves and stop trying to play god
- ozzmotik 8y ago
  ive never heard a convincing argument for why it's necessarily a bad thing to "play god". it just seems like an oft repeated phrase that makes no sense to me and only survived because of some idea that we have no right to try and discern the true nature of the universe and then to control it in the pursuit of betterment of our capacities as a species.
  - vxxzy 8y ago
    I wouldn't necessarily say "playing god", but we do vaccinate ourselves right? I mean I think the real issue is inflicting a change to a being that will become "Sentient" or "Conscious". When we genetically alter that which has potential for "life", do we know, beyond a doubt, that the change we inflict will be positive for the individual AND positive our species as a whole? If we cannot say for certain, then genetically altering sentient life (who have no choice), is not a good idea.
  - NotAnEconomist 8y ago
    Because a lot of "playing god" is thinly veiled authoritarianism -- the desire to control our fellows, out of our own egotism?
    - mynameisvlad 8y ago
      That's not what the term is generally used for. Generally speaking, "playing god" is talked about as messing with nature and the things around us to better suit our needs. Genetic engineering, climate engineering, etc. "God" refers to the natural order of things and trying to change it.
  - adrianN 8y ago
    "Playing God" is often used for activities where we're able to cause some change, have a hard time undoing our actions, and are unable see all possible consequences.

frevd 8y ago

No, if I understood right, this thing is a quantum computer solving NP-complete problems in linear time. And the article claims to have a simulation doing the same, but they are not sure whether this is actually only a special case scenario.

Filligree 8y ago
It found a solution. Not an optimal solution.
- frevd 8y ago
  Right, it is not guaranteed to find _the_ best solution possible, but at least it does find _some_ solution to NP-complete problems in linear time, which no classical algorithm is expected to be able to do. Now they claim in that article to have made a simulation of this running on a classical computer exhibiting the same characteristics, which frankly should not be possible. so where is the catch?
  - gus_massa 8y ago
    You can always find a solution to the TSP. All cities are connected with all cities, so you can travel the cities in the alphabetical order (or the order in list). It's (usually) a very bad solution that is much longer than the best solution. There are good heuristic, specially if the distances are not chosen at random but are the distance between points in the plane. So it's posible in some cases to find quite good solutions. The problem is NP-complete only is you ask for the best solution.
- sano1 8y ago
  Similar to the way my NN (brain) can solve the TS problem by just guessing the best route. Sure that's <i>a</i> solution. edit:typo
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    On Hackernews you can use asterisks to produce italics, like in markdown.

grahamburger 8y ago

Next up: a self driving car initiative called 'horse-and-buggy' that is exactly what it sounds like.

_ooqq 8y ago
They've been mastering the latter for a while now; the "buggy" part. :D