A revolutionary OS/Programming Idea

[Lynn H. Maxson]

Li, Xiao Feng writes:
"Hi, Dear Lynn, I don't think the evolution mechanism is 
something with "safety in numbers". It's exactly a process of 
adaptation which can be achieved by anything naturally or 
automatically in their eco system if they have the ability of 
mutation and reproduction, including software.  This process 
doesn't need "deus ex machina" and is completely 
unpredictable."

I hadn't really expected to get into this discussion, particularly 
in this forum.  I have to question the phrase "including 
software" in the above assertion.  No software ever written 
up to this point has the ability on its own volition to mutate or 
reproduce.  Nor will any software after this point in time.<g>  
The keyword here is "volition".  You could say "sentience" or 
"consciousness" or "intelligence" or any of the other words 
"we" have "invented" to explain a phenomenon we "think" we 
witness but do not understand.

We cannot replicate the brain or any living organism in 
software.  To say that we can continuously come closer to 
emulate it implies that this remains less than replication.  
Emulation with respect to living organisms occurs as 
replication in part.

I have no opposition to this process.  The closer we get the 
more we achieve.  But this is not differential calculus that 
allows you to get so close as to practically say "no 
difference" exists.  The fact that we put so much effort into 
getting ever so close only emphasizes how far we are from 
replication of something in which such effort is unnecessary.

Can we with software create systems which can think as we 
do?  No.  Can we with software create living organisms?  No.  
Can we do either with hardware that requires software? No.  
Can we do either with hardware alone?  Ashby offered a 
demonstration along this line with his homeostat.  Understand 
that he did not "understand" how it worked, only that it did.