FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-17-2002, 03:45 AM   #61
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 5,878
Post

(An aside: I sometimes wonder what benefit to mankind has been the story of an Intelligent Designer; I certainly don't see that ID has improved my life. Mr Van will burble on about morality, but that hypothesis has been so well and truly debunked that only the likes of Mr Van are able to repeat it without a derisory smile. )
Stephen T-B is offline  
Old 08-17-2002, 07:58 AM   #62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 762
Post

Here's a more recent example of a evolutionary algorithm in action.

<a href="http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/cybernews/story/0,1870,137917,00.html?" target="_blank">Robot teaches itself to fly</a>

Quote:
Mr Krister Wolff and Mr Peter Nordin of Chalmers University of Technology built a robot with wings and then gave it random instructions through a computer at the rate of 20 per second....
Mutation, the random component...

Quote:
Feedback from a movement detector told the program how successful each combination of instructions tried had been, enabling it to evolve by ditching unsuccessful ones and pairing up new combinations of the ones that produced most lift.
Coupled with selection, in this case artificial, but selection nonetheless, the nonrandom component. And that's all the system needs, as flying, like survival, is a quality that is quantitatively expressible and thus can be selected for.

[ August 17, 2002: Message edited by: Kevin Dorner ]</p>
Kevin Dorner is offline  
Old 08-17-2002, 08:43 AM   #63
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 913
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Mageth:
<strong>Not only that, but software a programmer writes may produce results (output) which the programmer's mind couldn't produce (e.g. due to complexity of computation), or even predict. Not many programmers have a "bug" in mind when they write a program, but virtually all programs have bugs, many of which can produce quirky, unpredictable results.

[ August 16, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</strong>
And sometimes those "quirky" results become so popular and expected that the 'bug' becomes a 'feature' in later releases of the software.

Sounds a lot like RM&NS to me....... but then what do I know, I've only been programming for almost 30 years.

And to re-inforce what other's have said, everyone for whom I've written software expects that the software will continue to work long after I have lost interest and have completely forgotten about it.
LeftCoast is offline  
Old 08-17-2002, 10:14 AM   #64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 5,393
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally posted by Baloo:
<strong> ...Inquiry into the theory of evolution has led directly to attempts to simulate the process with software.

Attempts to simulate the process led directly to the rapid development of genetic algorithms.

The incorporation of these algorithms into operating system design has led directly to much more efficient load-balancing on the part of operating systems on desktop PC's.

This has led directly to faster desktop PC's.

You, Van, are using a PC that is faster than it would be without genetic algorithms. You, Van, a member of mankind, have been directly, demonstratably, and irrefutably benefitted by evolutionary inquiry.

I feel I've led the horse to water... [/b]</strong>
The life-sciences implications of evolution are well known by me, but I was unaware, until now, of the direct impact evolutionary theory has upon the computer technology I am using right now.

Thanks to all who expounded upon this point at a level even I can understand.

Rick
Dr Rick is offline  
Old 08-19-2002, 01:38 AM   #65
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 5,878
Post

(Things have moved on, and I've been away, but I didn't want Vanderzyden to get away with thinking it is sufficient to prove a point by quoting fiction, as he did in a response earlier on in this thread)
Dear Mr V, quoting a character from fiction who has been loaded with the prejudices of its creator is evidence of your familiarity with that particular work of fiction; it is not evidence of any particular truth.
The point I made, and which you did not answer, is that we cannot pick and choose which areas of human curiosity shall be permitted because exploring them will be sure to massage the collective human ego.
Your description of Darwin’s discoveries - which arose not because he was following a Satanic agenda to undermine the Bible but simply because he was curious and had the energy and wit to go about methodically to satisfy it - as "dangerous" illustrates a Medieval mind-set which would have locked Mankind into Church-sponsored ignorance and superstition.
If that’s the world you want, go there, but I for one would resist with all my power being dragged back there with you
Stephen T-B is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:36 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.