= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Giles comments on Review of Kurzweil, 'The Singularity is Near' - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (43)
I think for the claim to make sense, you need to be able to do it without the "interpreting the DNA for x86" component. It seems very likely that such a thing would be way larger than the genome itself (i.e. the "really big prefix" that you mentioned). So I'm not sure in what sense you agree with the information theoretical claim? We're talking about a particular genome, not the general trend as genome size -> infinity.
I don't follow. If it's true for genomes in general, then it's true for particular genomes. Real-world genomes may be small enough that it is not useful in practice, but the theory is still true.