3 ms·
I believe Taleb sees the death of less fit offspring a small pain vs. the increased survival of fitter offspring - a big gain because it compounds with generati
by dmichulke 6y ago
I believe Taleb sees the death of less fit offspring a small pain vs. the increased survival of fitter offspring - a big gain because it compounds with generations.
Strangely, it also means that with the big brain and low numbers of offspring per pregnancy, human evolution itself turned away from high-mutation, high number of trials convex exploration to a more conservative exploitation of existing benefits.
Are we already that close to the best we genetically could be?
- techbio 6y agoIt is not as strange when you see information move from sexual/asexual genetic reproduction, to markings on clay tablets and the mental diversity of human knowledge propagating with faster, more flexible fitness functions than the foundational survival/extinction binary. DNA is an arbitrary (albeit important) replicant and not at all the only form of physical memory.
- sooheon 6y ago> human evolution itself turned away from high-mutation, high number of trials convex exploration to a more conservative exploitation of existing benefits. > Are we already that close to the best we genetically could be? Well nature as a whole hasn't exactly halted the high-mutation, high N strategy elsewhere in favor of humans (COVID-19?). It's just that cultural and technological evolution has outpaced it for humans, no nature was "right" to evolve the capacity for this additional vector of evolution. It'd be like if we ever develop AGI, the silicon we initially run it on won't be ideal, and whatever algorithmic evolution the AI experiences will far outpace our technological progress. If AI improves its physical computation platform, that would be like humans editing their genome.