They both assert a more fundamental level where one could stand and direct the malstrom for some 'higher' purpose. I don't think there is much evidence that this is possible (or should even be desired).
-
-
I take civ breakdowns to perform the same evolutionary function as extinction events: clear the boards so that the few survivors can explore more paths.
-
You assume survivors...
-
...while making an analogy with extinction events. But it might be more like shagging the hot girl at school: if you didn't take your chance when she drunkenly hit on you on prom night, you've missed it forever.
-
well, any extinction event might have a 100% extinction rate. which only means that the terrestrial brand of life wasn't up to the task.
-
Sure. And R/acc is interested in identifying the optimum (or at least bare minimum) conditions under which it might be.
-
you want a bird's view of the fitness landscape? lol
-
Generative evo capacity isn't that difficult to rank. Sure, give yourself an infinite timeline and anything is possible... But right now we're the frontier and (sadly) Capital hasn't shed its need to a bio substrate just yet.
-
if some pathways are really so clearly much better than others, then there's no need for patchwork. I obviously beg to differ: "unknown unknowns cosmically predominate", which means we have seen nothing.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.