Quote:


I see, now I understand where you're coming from. I tend to agree, however the selective factors are constantly changing so would life be possible in any other way but the 'brute force' way? I don't think so.




You get me!! I had the exact same question when wondering about this... So here's the answer i got from my professor..


Me
Quote:


On tues. you said the fittest human is the one who re-produces
> more. So i guess it's safe to say that if we figure out which people
> reproduce the most, we have our fitness criteria. With the minesweepers,
> we intervene every minute and choose which mineswepers would re-produce
> according to who collected more mines. And the criteria is always the same
> until we find a solution. Looking at human history however, the human that
> would re-produce more seems to change all the time! I mean, thousands of
> years ago, the physically strongest man would be the one that would
> survive all dangers(i'm talking pre-historic times..) and probably knock
> the most women unconsious before mating with them. However, in our times,
> it's mostly about the more socially successfull people, or the most
> atractive one. Attractive itself is also an issue that is never the same.
> "Attractive" women today would be considered to be ugly, years ago. So
> what helps if more attractive women are breeded by nature's GA algorithm,
> if at some point in the future, they are not considered to be attractive
> anymore? So to me, it looks like there's another level of abstraction on
> the fitness criteria, that we don't enforce in AGA's yet.. But to be
> honest, i'm just comfused..





Dr Corne
Quote:


- what natural evolution actually *optimises* is still under hot debate,
but it is just as much to do with what's good for the species as it
is to do with number of fertile children.
- personal fitness (e.g. what an individual human wants to attain
or improve in him/herself) is entirely separate from evolutionary
fitness. Evolution measures you in one way, you are free to measure
yourself in any way you like, and that may be quite different.
- Evolution is pretty damn good at what it does, but it is most
certainly very far from perfect. In many cases, it adapts too
slowly in relation to changes in the environment. This is why
dinosaurs are gone, why polar bears will follow them, and so on.
So we shouldn't (as many people do) bring it up in a context
like "this is what evolution "says" " so it must be right.




INTENSE AI: Use the Best AI around for your games!
Join our Forums now! | Get Intense Pathfinding 3 Free!