5 ms·

Natural evolution is best? One word: wheel . . . Linux as a whole was not designed -- that is easy to accept, and also that it is a strength. However, design

by hxa7241 17y ago

Natural evolution is best? One word: wheel . . . Linux as a whole was not designed -- that is easy to accept, and also that it is a strength. However, design is not so entirely opposed to evolution as might be inferred. Design seems essentially to have some iterative character too. It always entails a some series of ideas, rejections, and then further adjusted ideas. That is deliberately controlled, but it still has variation and selection -- so the possibility of blending between design and evolution is very reasonable. And given the wheel example, artificial design has something to offer too. (I think Torvalds' view is consonant with this. -- I mean, is he not overall offering some combination of evolution and design?)

bad_user 17y ago
Your wheel example is not good. Before wheels, I'm pretty sure people used tree trunks to drag heavy objects from A to B. And I'm pretty sure the wheel's inventor hasn't envisioned the average consumer car we have today either. Linus's point is that design happens at a micro-level, but at a macroscopic level the direction of a successful project should be made by trial and error with a feedback cycle. To put things in perspective ... Linux is not designed for servers, it is not designed for desktops, it is not designed for real-time systems, it is not designed for mobile phones. When people wanted to use Linux for such stuff, they took it and modified it to their will, and the parts that slowed them down were eventually removed / refactored. That's actually very true if you look at the history of many successful projects. And that's evolution more than design. "Release early and often" is exactly about this.
- hxa7241 17y ago
  > Your wheel example is not good. Well, no it isn't too good. But it does basically fit: It is a small feature of larger systems, as you describe, and it has been done better by artificial design.
- gatormax 17y ago
  Hmmm... idea: design at the micro-level = hypothesis formulation direction of successful project at macroscopic level = repeated testing and reformulation of hypothesis in other words, project success is science well applied
Tuna-Fish 17y ago
> Natural evolution is best? One word: wheel . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_spider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_spider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoop_snake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoop_snake Evolution got there repeatedly. Legs just work better cross-country, and there didn't use to be much roads around.
- dstorrs 17y ago
  Not challenging your point, just curious...do you know of any (non-human) animals that have harnessed fire? I don't mean in an "environmental" way, like looking for food along the edges of a burn, or having IR-sensitive vision, I mean actually collecting it, containing it, using it as a tool. Or is that a uniquely human trait?
  - btilly 17y ago
    To the best of my knowledge that is a uniquely human trait. And we not only harness it - we are dependent on it. Over time our digestive systems have adapted to require cooked food. (Every known culture cooks food. Theoretically you can live on uncooked food. However the few who try it have to eat constantly and tend to be skinny...)
    - jacquesm 17y ago
      What's wrong with being skinny ? I can see the point of not having to eat constantly, but if skinny is one end of the spectrum and overweight is the other I'd rather be skinny.
      - rosser 17y ago
        As a skinny fellow, I tend to agree -- or, rather, my metabolism agrees for me. Counter-point, though: consider the "obesity paradox". Statistically, obesity correlates massively more positively with survival in the face of catastrophic illness (cancer, &c) than for folks with a normal-ish BMI, let alone the scrawny ones. It's probably a less "selective" (in the evolutionary sense) trait than it might be, in that cancer tends to be an ailment associated with at least somewhat advanced age, a time by which most people who are going to will likely have bred.
billswift 17y ago
Of course natural is best. That's why peregrine falcons are faster than F-16 Falcons.
- nollidge 17y ago
  Peregrine falcons are probably better at catching food.
- eru 17y ago
  However F-16 Falcons do not reproduce.
  - mncaudill 17y ago
    Sure they do -- take several government contractors and just add cash.
    - eru 17y ago
      No F-16 needed to start the process. Thus no reproduction.
tybris 17y ago
Wheels are quite unpractical. Their only advantage is that they require relatively little energy over long distances. However, why not reduce the need for long distances or not create it in the first place?
hxa7241 17y ago
Postscriptum: Saying "wheel!" is crude and invites a simple counter. But the point is there is a simple, important thing where artifice has a substantial lead. And without well-chosen application of design, the large-scale evolution might be practically excluded from certain areas. (. . . that was really a side issue. It was the procedural similarity of design and evolution -- they are not so much opposed, as differently balanced.)

by hxa7241 17y ago

bad_user 17y ago

Your wheel example is not good. Before wheels, I'm pretty sure people used tree trunks to drag heavy objects from A to B. And I'm pretty sure the wheel's inventor hasn't envisioned the average consumer car we have today either. Linus's point is that design happens at a micro-level, but at a macroscopic level the direction of a successful project should be made by trial and error with a feedback cycle. To put things in perspective ... Linux is not designed for servers, it is not designed for desktops, it is not designed for real-time systems, it is not designed for mobile phones. When people wanted to use Linux for such stuff, they took it and modified it to their will, and the parts that slowed them down were eventually removed / refactored. That's actually very true if you look at the history of many successful projects. And that's evolution more than design. "Release early and often" is exactly about this.

hxa7241 17y ago
> Your wheel example is not good. Well, no it isn't too good. But it does basically fit: It is a small feature of larger systems, as you describe, and it has been done better by artificial design.
gatormax 17y ago
Hmmm... idea: design at the micro-level = hypothesis formulation direction of successful project at macroscopic level = repeated testing and reformulation of hypothesis in other words, project success is science well applied

Tuna-Fish 17y ago

> Natural evolution is best? One word: wheel . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_spider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_spider http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoop_snake http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoop_snake Evolution got there repeatedly. Legs just work better cross-country, and there didn't use to be much roads around.

dstorrs 17y ago
Not challenging your point, just curious...do you know of any (non-human) animals that have harnessed fire? I don't mean in an "environmental" way, like looking for food along the edges of a burn, or having IR-sensitive vision, I mean actually collecting it, containing it, using it as a tool. Or is that a uniquely human trait?
- btilly 17y ago
  To the best of my knowledge that is a uniquely human trait. And we not only harness it - we are dependent on it. Over time our digestive systems have adapted to require cooked food. (Every known culture cooks food. Theoretically you can live on uncooked food. However the few who try it have to eat constantly and tend to be skinny...)
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    What's wrong with being skinny ? I can see the point of not having to eat constantly, but if skinny is one end of the spectrum and overweight is the other I'd rather be skinny.
    - rosser 17y ago
      As a skinny fellow, I tend to agree -- or, rather, my metabolism agrees for me. Counter-point, though: consider the "obesity paradox". Statistically, obesity correlates massively more positively with survival in the face of catastrophic illness (cancer, &c) than for folks with a normal-ish BMI, let alone the scrawny ones. It's probably a less "selective" (in the evolutionary sense) trait than it might be, in that cancer tends to be an ailment associated with at least somewhat advanced age, a time by which most people who are going to will likely have bred.

billswift 17y ago

Of course natural is best. That's why peregrine falcons are faster than F-16 Falcons.

nollidge 17y ago
Peregrine falcons are probably better at catching food.
eru 17y ago
However F-16 Falcons do not reproduce.
- mncaudill 17y ago
  Sure they do -- take several government contractors and just add cash.
  - eru 17y ago
    No F-16 needed to start the process. Thus no reproduction.

tybris 17y ago

Wheels are quite unpractical. Their only advantage is that they require relatively little energy over long distances. However, why not reduce the need for long distances or not create it in the first place?

hxa7241 17y ago

Postscriptum: Saying "wheel!" is crude and invites a simple counter. But the point is there is a simple, important thing where artifice has a substantial lead. And without well-chosen application of design, the large-scale evolution might be practically excluded from certain areas. (. . . that was really a side issue. It was the procedural similarity of design and evolution -- they are not so much opposed, as differently balanced.)