3 ms·
We have not yet rewritten any of our own code (i.e., DNA), and if we do we still have to prove that the "re-written" person is more capable of re-writing subseq
by zwkrt 8y ago
We have not yet rewritten any of our own code (i.e., DNA), and if we do we still have to prove that the "re-written" person is more capable of re-writing subsequent people in an even more efficient way.
- monocasa 8y ago> We have not yet rewritten any of our own code (i.e., DNA) Well... other than that one time... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lulu_and_Nana_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lulu_and_Nana_controversy
- visarga 8y agoWe are rewriting our API and OS (language, culture) all the time, though.
- naasking 8y ago> We have not yet rewritten any of our own code (i.e., DNA) Interpreting "code" as "DNA" is too literal. It could apply to thinking processes and mental models, cultural and social norms, and so on. A universal Turing machine (UTM) can mimic any other Turing machine via interpretation, including a Godel machine. So an interpreted Godel machine isn't changing the code of the UTM, the analogue of our DNA, but it's changing the interpreted code, the analogue of higher level processes like those I list above.