RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 160
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 01 2007,10:51   

Gil Dodgen has opined on the relative value of Zachriel's word Mutagenation program.  Of course Zach is quite capable of pointing out the numerous idiotic comments in Dodgen's reply, but I can't help jumping on the bandwagon pre-emptively.

Dodgen starts out:

I downloaded the simulation and looked at the source code. It is written in a programming language with which I am extremely familiar because I used it to develop the mission planner for our company’s guided airdrop system.

Yes, we are all impressed by your ability to write simulations.  

And continues:
I had to chuckle.

He then spends the next 4 paragraphs describing the binary search implemented to make the dictionary lookup (read: fitness evaluation) efficient.  What does this prove?
It proves that Dodgen knows what a binary search is - i.e. Dodgen took a second semester programming course.  What does it say about the relevance of Word Mutagenation as a model of evolutionary biology?  NOTHING.  The efficiency of the algorithm for determining word fitness has NOTHING to do with the fact that Word Mutagenation finds words via RM+NS.  (Much like my own humble additions do here:
and here:

Dodgen continues:
None of this has anything to do with biological Darwinian evolution.

But Dodgen has moved the goalposts - the author of the e-mail didn't want ot simulate biological evolution - he wanted to show that RM+NS was an effective search strategy - which he did.

Tell us again about mutating the hardware Dodgen, that at least was funny.

(edit: link fixed)

  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]