6 ms·

Isn't it evolution and Darwinian selection? Bad pieces tend to die out, good pieces get replicated, "breed", mutated and incorporated[1]. Biological systems ar

by stared 7y ago

Isn't it evolution and Darwinian selection? Bad pieces tend to die out, good pieces get replicated, "breed", mutated and incorporated[1]. Biological systems are not fault-tolerant. They are resilient on the average, under typical conditions. [1] Among species, we get vertical transfer of genes (parent(s) to offsprings), horizontal (e.g. plasmids between bacteria). Getting as a piece of DNA as a submodule (this element-of relationship) is rare... but happens (e.g the mitochondrium). In software, it is one of the most common relationships.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago
Not quite? Life is resilient under the worst case. If it weren't, the first time the worst case came around (drought year/early freeze/whatever) that form would become extinct. Sure there's a distribution (gene pool) and some is merely resistant under normal conditions. That kind prospers, but keeps the 'worst case' genes handy. A few members of the population are the 'prepper' members, and if this year is the worst case then the species survives. Anyway something like that.
- stared 7y ago
  Drought is still a "typical" condition. (I.e. one from its environment, from the last hundreds of thousands of years or so.) Selection pressure worked on that. Yes, it may be a condition that makes 10%, 50% or 90% percent of the population to die - and it is not a problem, in the grand scheme of things. Not normal conditions are things that were never tested, or never tested to that extend. E.g. an invasive species from a different continent, a chemical compound, different pH of water, etc. Consequently, many species die out completely - as there is not enough time for the selection of better-fitted genes for this setting. Also: compare with machine learning, and giving a sample out of the training dataset distribution (all photos are shot in good light, give one in the dark). Usually, the answer is meaningless.
TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
Selection depends on a fitness function. The fitness function for a lot of software is some weighted combination of profitability, mindshare, and novelty, not some abstract measure of quality and stability.
Barrin92 7y ago
>Isn't it evolution and Darwinian selection? Yeah I find the question Hoare poses a little bit hilarious because it is so stereotypically academic and 'mathy'. Software got reliable the same way not only biological systems but also markets produce reliable solutions without experts needing to write formal specifications down. By decentrally and through many iterations producing incremental improvements with price signals and adoption as a measure for success, and faulty software being replaced by better competition.
machawinka 7y ago
More like fractal evolution.
daxfohl 7y ago
Yeah I was going to compare it to the anthropic principle. It's the way it is because if it wasn't then we would have something different. No beautiful underlying reason.

by stared 7y ago

JoeAltmaier 7y ago

Not quite? Life is resilient under the worst case. If it weren't, the first time the worst case came around (drought year/early freeze/whatever) that form would become extinct. Sure there's a distribution (gene pool) and some is merely resistant under normal conditions. That kind prospers, but keeps the 'worst case' genes handy. A few members of the population are the 'prepper' members, and if this year is the worst case then the species survives. Anyway something like that.

stared 7y ago
Drought is still a "typical" condition. (I.e. one from its environment, from the last hundreds of thousands of years or so.) Selection pressure worked on that. Yes, it may be a condition that makes 10%, 50% or 90% percent of the population to die - and it is not a problem, in the grand scheme of things. Not normal conditions are things that were never tested, or never tested to that extend. E.g. an invasive species from a different continent, a chemical compound, different pH of water, etc. Consequently, many species die out completely - as there is not enough time for the selection of better-fitted genes for this setting. Also: compare with machine learning, and giving a sample out of the training dataset distribution (all photos are shot in good light, give one in the dark). Usually, the answer is meaningless.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago

Selection depends on a fitness function. The fitness function for a lot of software is some weighted combination of profitability, mindshare, and novelty, not some abstract measure of quality and stability.

Barrin92 7y ago

>Isn't it evolution and Darwinian selection? Yeah I find the question Hoare poses a little bit hilarious because it is so stereotypically academic and 'mathy'. Software got reliable the same way not only biological systems but also markets produce reliable solutions without experts needing to write formal specifications down. By decentrally and through many iterations producing incremental improvements with price signals and adoption as a measure for success, and faulty software being replaced by better competition.

machawinka 7y ago

More like fractal evolution.

daxfohl 7y ago

Yeah I was going to compare it to the anthropic principle. It's the way it is because if it wasn't then we would have something different. No beautiful underlying reason.