4 ms·

(disclaimer: paywalled so I read 2 paragraphs) Is this just like running the game of life [1] on a giant random board and seeing some generators emerge? Or som

by remram 2y ago

(disclaimer: paywalled so I read 2 paragraphs) Is this just like running the game of life [1] on a giant random board and seeing some generators emerge? Or something actually significant? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life

bongodongobob 2y ago
Yes basically, but more like Core Wars. This shouldn't be surprising to anyone, I really don't see anything new here or the point of this news release.
raytopia 2y ago
From the article: "This research is far from the first attempt at mimicking life digitally: for example, simulations such as the Game of Life, which has a grid of cells that are either “alive” or “dead” and are governed by simple rules, have shown self-replicating behaviour. Laurie says what makes this work unique is that the system had no formal rules, goals or processes to encourage or kick-start artificial life – it simply arrived. “It all fizzes around and then suddenly: boom, they’re all the same,” he says." Still not sure if that means it's significant or not. Cool none the less though.
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  It's not. It's completely expected. People have been using genetic evolution for Core Wars for decades. This isn't any different. Of course something will eventually replicate. There will be overwrites of the copies from other organisms etc that will mutate it. Only way I could see this being surprising is if I was an 18 year old intern who has never played with something like this before. This isn't bringing anything new to the table.
  - pests 2y ago
    I think you're being overly dismissive. Does anything excite you?
    - bongodongobob 2y ago
      Of course, but this is not new in any way. I was playing with similar stuff in the 90s so I'm confused as to why Google is reporting this as anything new. Someone's personal blog? I get it. Google? This shouldn't be news to them.
- remram 2y ago
  Given that the game of life also has "no formal rules, goals or processes to encourage or kick-start artificial life", this Laurie person is very wrong or very misquoted.
  - ENGNR 2y ago
    I’m pretty sure the game of life was made by looking at different rule systems and manually picking the rules that were the most interesting
    - remram 2y ago
      Whereas this didn't? They phrased it "*formal* rules" (emph mine).
achille 2y ago
It's more significant than that. These self-replicating alife systems will dominate energy consumption and will be the largest forms of life.
GTP 2y ago
Good question, it's addressed in the article: "This research is far from the first attempt at mimicking life digitally: for example, simulations such as the Game of Life, which has a grid of cells that are either “alive” or “dead” and are governed by simple rules, have shown self-replicating behaviour. Laurie says what makes this work unique is that the system had no formal rules, goals or processes to encourage or kick-start artificial life – it simply arrived. “It all fizzes around and then suddenly: boom, they’re all the same,” he says." Another user posted a link to the full (non paywalled) article, it's worth a read. It also presents a few critic views.

by remram 2y ago

bongodongobob 2y ago

Yes basically, but more like Core Wars. This shouldn't be surprising to anyone, I really don't see anything new here or the point of this news release.

raytopia 2y ago

From the article: "This research is far from the first attempt at mimicking life digitally: for example, simulations such as the Game of Life, which has a grid of cells that are either “alive” or “dead” and are governed by simple rules, have shown self-replicating behaviour. Laurie says what makes this work unique is that the system had no formal rules, goals or processes to encourage or kick-start artificial life – it simply arrived. “It all fizzes around and then suddenly: boom, they’re all the same,” he says." Still not sure if that means it's significant or not. Cool none the less though.

bongodongobob 2y ago
It's not. It's completely expected. People have been using genetic evolution for Core Wars for decades. This isn't any different. Of course something will eventually replicate. There will be overwrites of the copies from other organisms etc that will mutate it. Only way I could see this being surprising is if I was an 18 year old intern who has never played with something like this before. This isn't bringing anything new to the table.
- pests 2y ago
  I think you're being overly dismissive. Does anything excite you?
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    Of course, but this is not new in any way. I was playing with similar stuff in the 90s so I'm confused as to why Google is reporting this as anything new. Someone's personal blog? I get it. Google? This shouldn't be news to them.
remram 2y ago
Given that the game of life also has "no formal rules, goals or processes to encourage or kick-start artificial life", this Laurie person is very wrong or very misquoted.
- ENGNR 2y ago
  I’m pretty sure the game of life was made by looking at different rule systems and manually picking the rules that were the most interesting
  - remram 2y ago
    Whereas this didn't? They phrased it "*formal* rules" (emph mine).

achille 2y ago

It's more significant than that. These self-replicating alife systems will dominate energy consumption and will be the largest forms of life.

GTP 2y ago

Good question, it's addressed in the article: "This research is far from the first attempt at mimicking life digitally: for example, simulations such as the Game of Life, which has a grid of cells that are either “alive” or “dead” and are governed by simple rules, have shown self-replicating behaviour. Laurie says what makes this work unique is that the system had no formal rules, goals or processes to encourage or kick-start artificial life – it simply arrived. “It all fizzes around and then suddenly: boom, they’re all the same,” he says." Another user posted a link to the full (non paywalled) article, it's worth a read. It also presents a few critic views.