It surprises me that a multitude of separately developed systems acting in the same 'playground' don't give rise to more emergent behavior. I would expect acci

It surprises me that a multitude of separately developed systems acting in the same 'playground' don't give rise to more emergent behavior. I would expect accidental death spirals as systems unknowingly couple together and get caught in a loop of failing together, along with the polar opposite of just astronomical growth spurred by nothing but the systems bidding logic interlocking in unexpected ways. Sure there have been catastrophic failures like Knight Capital, but those, at leas the ones I am aware of, all boil down to the system having flaws. I have yet to see a system which worked and followed the logic the designers intended, but which is accidentally (or purposely?) exploited by other automated systems doing the same. Shouldn't the complexity of these systems make such a thing almost inevitable and common?