Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Virtual Genetic Evolution

Posted by michael on from the still-vulnerable-to-dandruff-shampoo dept.

Sleeperservice writes "This story at New Scientist describes how, using cell simulation in computers, evolution can be simulated. How long until we can work out what the DNA sequence for a Dragon should be I wonder?"

5 of 232 comments (clear)

  1. How long before we get virtual humans? by strredwolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They're speeding up evolution via a cell simulator. How long will it be before we get true AI by teaching a virtual human that was just freshly evolved? :)

    --

    --
    # Canmephians for a better Linux Kernel
    $Stalag99{"URL"}="http://stalag99.net";
    1. Re:How long before we get virtual humans? by powerlinekid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They discuss the last part of your comment in the article. What drives the "evolution" is the complexity of the task at hand. Whether its pushing a box or something else, they say that it is very very important to keep coming up with new tasks to push the limits of the little cyber-critters. I would think that without an enviroment that demands adaptation, evolution would occur either very slowly or not at all. I mean how far do you think we would of evolved if say everyone had food and didn't have to worry about predators? We'd probably evolve to the point where we die off at an acceptable rate in order not to cause overcrowding and hurt the species in the long term. Of course some rouge critter would probably develop a gene to live longer, so maybe you can't stop evolution anyway.

      Just in case someone says that evolution is "just gene mutation", I would disagree. I would say that evolution is "gene mutation" that benefits the entity that has mutated and made it better adapted to it's enviroment than say average-joe-critter.

      --

      can't sleep slashdot will eat me
  2. The sheer Arrogance of slashdot posters by siewsk · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The sheer arrogance of the slashdot poster is unbelievable. Just listen to this:

    This story at New Scientist describes how, using cell simulation in computers, evolution can be simulated. How long until we can work out what the DNA sequence for a Dragon should be I wonder?

    Come on! The simulation is about as closer to reality as the economist assumptions of the rational consumers. You don't know how many corners they can cut in their simulation. It's just a simulation and it is as good as the assumptions made by the people who created the simulation. Real life is messy and difficult to predict. It will be hundreds of years before they get the simulation even close to the true working of a real cell.

  3. Re:Until they can deal with ACGT... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Um ... we know perfectly well what they do: make copies of themselves. Now, the circumstances under which they make copies of themselves, and close analogues of themselves in RNA, is in most cases still an open question -- but simulations like this are an important step on the road to figuring that out. Of course it's trial and error; that's how science works.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
  4. Re:Heathens by EatYourGreens · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Before I reply to this article, I would like to say that I am an Evangelical Christian. I believe in God, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that the Bible is the revealed work of the Holy Spirit. ... and I believe that we are here as the result of many years of evolution. I am aware that this thread is not about the evolution/creation debate, so I am not going to try to counter the poster's comments point for point. I would just like /.ers to know that there are Christians who can still think straight (at least in Germany). I believe in God because I find the evidence overwhelming. I believe in evolution because I find the evidence overwhelming. It belittles God and makes Christians look stupid when Christians say that evolution runs counter to the second law of thermodynamics, or when they point to mistakes that scientists have made in the past while trying to formulate the theory of evolution. If evolution could be so easily disproved, then I think the thousands of scientists who have studied evolution over the years would have worked this out by now. I am sure I will be flamed for this, but I am prepared to take the risk. However, I have written this for all the Cristians in the world who have not had their brains removed, who can worship God and marvel at the amazing things evolution has made. For these Christian (I know of many who hold this view, several educated to Doctorate level) there is no tension.