The analogy doesn't work at all because DNA is more like a program than a tragedy (yeah, some programs are actually tragic but stay focused, please). Changing o

The analogy doesn't work at all because DNA is more like a program than a tragedy (yeah, some programs are actually tragic but stay focused, please). Changing only one character in a program can have catastrophic consequences. Biological systems are generally more tolerant because they are highly redundant but still; 1% can easily explain the differences. I just don't understand why he doesn't pick the obviously better analogy although somewhere else in the interview he shows some computer knowledge. And I don't know why he relates intelligence to DNA when we know that crows can compete with chimps on tool use.