= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on An overall schema for the friendly AI problems: self-referential convergence criteria - 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 (110)
I'm not sure that's true. Imagine some glorious postbiological future in which people (or animals or ideas or whatever) can reproduce without limit. There are two competing replicators A and B, and the only difference is that A replicates slightly faster than B. After a while there will be vastly more of A around than of B, even if nothing dies. For many purposes, that might be enough.
So, in this scenario, what evolved?
The distribution of A and B in the population.
I don't think this is an appropriate use of the word "evolution".
Why not? It's a standard one in the biological context. E.g.,
which according to a talk.origins FAQ is from this textbook: Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974