To me, for some thing to be a replicator, that thing must include the machinery for replication. Viruses do not include that machinery. Cellular life does not

To me, for some thing to be a replicator, that thing must include the machinery for replication. Viruses do not include that machinery. Cellular life does not include the food required to replicate, but it has the information, the machinery, and the mechanisms to gather the required resources. It is, I think, somewhat arbitrary where you draw the distinction, but it seems useful to divide replicators which do not include machinery from those that do. There are probably things which sit on this divide and make it hard to draw a distinction. That's life. It's not required to fit into our mental and linguistic bins I suppose.