To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
>> anybody who gets their evolution wisdom from... I wouldn't trust yours -- or his -- ideas <<
I read 3 of Dawkins' books too, and for example there's nothing mysterious about the genetic markers traced by Spencer Wells' "Journey of Man" - mutations clearly do happen. But the Eigen's Error-Catastrophe which Paul Davies muses on in "Fifth Miracle" invites philosophizing - without that mysterious DNA-self-repair-or-checksumming the genome would degenerate hurriedly, in other words the human genome is already too complex to be stable against random mutations without the self-repair - how does DNA-self-repair know the beneficial mutations it should tolerate ?
But the Eigen's Error-Catastrophe which Paul Davies muses on in "Fifth Miracle" invites philosophizing - without that mysterious DNA-self-repair-or-checksumming the genome would degenerate hurriedly, in other words the human genome is already too complex to be stable against random mutations without the self-repair - how does DNA-self-repair know the beneficial mutations it should tolerate ?
Although it would be a major derail to delve into that topic here, I'm sure that other forums, such as
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/forumdisplay.php?f=66
could give you all the answer you need on that one.
But back to OS development, parallels with biological evolution are probably greater than you suspect with the incremental change model -- and that doesn't even preclude adopting major, revolutionary ideas: that's no different in principle than the bacterial sharing of genomic information. The incremental vs major redesign issues aren't mutually incompatible either.
What's important, with respect to the posted article -- compatibility -- has less to do with the development method, and more to do with development goals.




Member since:
2005-07-24
"Back in my ancient University days I was fascinated by Koestler, while today Michael Behe sits on the shelf. The idea that you can't always get there with incremental-improvements-always-forward is Deeply Strategic."
And anybody who gets their evolution wisdom from Michael Behe is getting misled. I wouldn't trust yours -- or his -- ideas about OS development any more than his (utterly bogus) ideas on biological development.