Re: [glob2-devel] Globulation Lore v1.0

[Federico P]

Uh!
I'm sorry if i somehow irritated you with my opinion :(
I also must thank you for so dectailed answer, whenever i'll be able to read 
so hard questions in english i'll give a try to your docs.
Back in topic, i'm not trying to give a programming scheme for this game

quote:
> Ants work, for sure, but they are ultra-complex devices with thousands of
> sensors, hundreds of actuators, and one-quarter million neurons.
[...]
> So, as a conclusion, let us say that yes, emergence is a very interesting
> phenomenon, but that our models of it and its usefulness as an engineering
> tool are so weak that we could as well try to become immortal for the same
> price.

I'm just trying to give a sense for the player which approach the game and 
can't find coerence for his role in the globulation scheme.
We are talkin about a storyline, environment and graphic effects.

If i get you right, you talking about usefullness of emergency to solve 
programming troubles (genetic algorithms, fuzzy logic or whatever) which for 
sure doesn't fit programming needs in globulation (or maybe yes in IA.. 
whatever). 
 
Quinn Yee Qin Teh got me right:
[quote]
> The humans built the globs as a self-sustaining terraforming entity to
>terraform the planet, and the entire entity is controlled by a central AI,
>which is the player. The central AI is not located in a central CPU or
>location, but is an emergent entity as a result of the communication between
>the globs (is this what you mean Federico?).

Well i won't push this anymore if it's annoying.

greetz 
-fede

> > Actually an overmind is exactly a refuse to consider emergency...
>
> Yes, but considering emergency as a miracle solution to engineer devices
> shows a lack of sense of reality. I know this, I have worked in this field
> for more than two years and co-authored a paper on emergent behaviours for
> swarm of robots [1].
>
> Ants work, for sure, but they are ultra-complex devices with thousands of
> sensors, hundreds of actuators, and one-quarter million neurons. Ants have
> been produced using the physical engine of reality by evolving over the
> whole earth for five billion years. Do not underestimate the amount of
> FLOPS that a small portion of space itself can perform.
>
> As comparison, robots in [1] have two sensors (14 inputs), two actuators,
> and three neurons. Their rather stupid behaviours took weeks to evolve on
> state of the art computers using a custom-tailord simulator [2, 3].
>
> So, as a conclusion, let us say that yes, emergence is a very interesting
> phenomenon, but that our models of it and its usefulness as an engineering
> tool are so weak that we could as well try to become immortal for the same
> price.
>
> So I still vote for the distributed overmind. Have a nice day,
>
> Steph
>
>
> [1]   Evolutionary Conditions for the Emergence of Communication in Robots
> Dario Floreano, Sara Mitri, Stéphane Magnenat, Laurent Keller. Current
> Biology, vol. 17, pages 1–6, DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.01.058, 2007.
> "http://stephane.magnenat.net/data/Evolutionary Conditions for the
> Emergence of Communication in Robots - Dario Floreano, Sara Mitri, Stéphane
> Magnenat, Laurent Keller - Current Biology - 2007.pdf"
> [2]   http://mobots.epfl.ch/enki.html
> [3]   http://lis.epfl.ch/resources/teem/index.php