[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Concerning the use of abort in the source of lynx

From: Michael Sokolov
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Concerning the use of abort in the source of lynx
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 00 18:33:57 CDT

pAb-032871 <address@hidden> wrote:

> I have to disagree here: environmental variables play a HUGE part
> in development.  Ask any crack-baby, or another child born with
> Foetal Alcohol Syndrome.  As do many trace minerals, recently-discovered
> proteins, and "rediscovered" proteins that are well-known, but
> whose properties weren't fully understood before.  All of them
> affect both physical and mental development.

Ahh, here's what you are missing here. Problems with children of alcoholics,
etc. are a result of the program code being already corrupted at conception.
Once the program is running, no external factors affect its execution path. OK,
if the mother gets intoxicated during pregnancy the baby does get hurt, but
this is not a case of the program taking a different code path, but simple
physical destruction. Your computer also boots the same way regardless of
whether it's cold or hot, but if it gets really hot, it will melt.

> The 800 MB program you're referring to is the human genome?

It's the size of the DNA program image. According to biologists, there are over
3 billion amino acid residues in it, each encoding 2 bits. This translates into
over 6 Gbits or about 800 Mbytes.

It's the same for humans as it is for amoebas, the simplest single-cell

> This
> is a bit conservative; what about the many GB of genetic information
> in your front yard?  How many species in a half acre of grass?
> Yes it's remarkable, but a few billion years of random trial-and-error
> will do that.  I'm sure you've heard of the learning curves in
> some of the crude artificial intelligenes that exist today --
> and their little chip-brains are no more developed than your average
> garden insect.
> Call it hereditary learning: this experiment produces results
> and the other does not.  One mutant subspecies thrives, another
> disappears.  I never much liked IQ tests, but imagine one that
> carries on over geological time.

Here lies the rub. As it turns out, the difference in the DNA code between all
known creatures on Earth, and not just between different humans or humans and
monkeys, but between us and amoebas, is only about 10%. To me as a programmer
it is obvious that this has nothing to do with evolution. Most of the DNA
program has remained absolutely unchanged over the past two billion years, and
there is no clue to its origin whatsoever other than the only possible logical
answer: extraterrestrial. The amoebas that existed on Earth two billion years
ago had all the software in them for building a human (or at least a
chimpansee, intelligence is a story for another day), and only the hooks needed
to be activated (by whom? UFOs?) in the remaining 10% of the program image to
call the right routines.

Michael Sokolov         Harhan Engineering Laboratory
Public Service Agent    International Free Computing Task Force
                        International Engineering and Science Task Force
                        615 N GOOD LATIMER EXPY STE #4
                        DALLAS TX 75204-5852 USA

Phone: +1-214-824-7693 (Harhan Eng Lab office)
E-mail: address@hidden (ARPA TCP/SMTP) (UUCP coming soon)

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]