You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Lumifer comments on Open Thread, October 20 - 26, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

2 Post author: Adele_L 21 October 2013 03:11AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (211)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 21 October 2013 05:56:15PM 2 points [-]

Plenty of people predict that increased antibiotica use will lead to a raise in antibiotica resistance among bacteria.

What do you mean, "predict"? It has been empirically observed, a lot.

Grass has more iterations behind them and is therefore better optimized for the enviroment than the trees.

Huh? It doesn't work like that at all. For one thing, the "environment" isn't stable.

Comment author: ChristianKl 22 October 2013 03:30:04PM *  2 points [-]

What do you mean, "predict"? It has been empirically observed, a lot.

cousin made the claim that we can only say something about evolution that happened in the past. I say that we can confidently predict that increasing antibiotica resistance among bacteria will continue in the future.

Huh? It doesn't work like that at all. For one thing, the "environment" isn't stable.

Firstly describing complex system in a ew words is seldom completely accurate. The question is whether it's a useful mental model for thinking about it. In this case the idea I wanted to communicate is that it's very useful to think about the speed of iterations and the competitive advantage that a specis gets by having as advantage of hundred of millions of iterations over their competitors.

The enviroment doesn't have to be stable for the argument that I made. In changing enviroments a spezies with faster iterations adapts faster. A lot of genetic adaptions are also about housekeeping genes that are useful in most enviroments.