In terms of a comparison between genetic and technical programming, yes. They can't be compared like-for-like but if you compare a nucleotide base to a machine-level operator, most phone operating systems come out ahead. For comparison, I intended a phone with no apps whatsoever, not even the ability to dial a number or send a text. Add the apps most phones are bundled with (and the ones people add) and the phone is far ahead as one individual app can be more complex programmatically than a small fish.
It's very easy to look at the results of modern computer programming as simplistic but this is because it's intended to feel like that. In actuality, a layer based model abstracts even the programmer from the hardware. There is a lot going on at the lowest level. When my phone is going full-tilt, it is doing 1.4 billion things per second (best example I can give without getting into processor benchmarking). Imagine how complicated something has to be to require 1.4 billion operations to complete. And that's just for something taking a second. As a very rough example, the process of sending a text message would take twenty to thirty million low-level operations.
I promise you, I did think very hard before making the comparison and I'm one of those rare weirdos who has actually written and designed operating systems in native code and who also has a bit of a background in the medical sciences.
Don't get me wrong, I understand how complex the technology is in a mobile phone. I myself did some low level programming back in college and I do like the comparison between genetic code and programming code. The problem is the fish has a brain, this means it is so complex we will never fully understand how the fish works. Yeah you could compare the brain to a processor in terms of flops but we are talking about complexity not speed. The processor might seem complex but it is simple enough that a brain designed and developed it. One of my neurology lecturers once said that if the brain was simple enough for us to ever understand it then we would be too 'stupid' to understand it.
IIN to wonder if machines will ever be given rights?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
In terms of a comparison between genetic and technical programming, yes. They can't be compared like-for-like but if you compare a nucleotide base to a machine-level operator, most phone operating systems come out ahead. For comparison, I intended a phone with no apps whatsoever, not even the ability to dial a number or send a text. Add the apps most phones are bundled with (and the ones people add) and the phone is far ahead as one individual app can be more complex programmatically than a small fish.
It's very easy to look at the results of modern computer programming as simplistic but this is because it's intended to feel like that. In actuality, a layer based model abstracts even the programmer from the hardware. There is a lot going on at the lowest level. When my phone is going full-tilt, it is doing 1.4 billion things per second (best example I can give without getting into processor benchmarking). Imagine how complicated something has to be to require 1.4 billion operations to complete. And that's just for something taking a second. As a very rough example, the process of sending a text message would take twenty to thirty million low-level operations.
I promise you, I did think very hard before making the comparison and I'm one of those rare weirdos who has actually written and designed operating systems in native code and who also has a bit of a background in the medical sciences.
--
Darkoil
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Don't get me wrong, I understand how complex the technology is in a mobile phone. I myself did some low level programming back in college and I do like the comparison between genetic code and programming code. The problem is the fish has a brain, this means it is so complex we will never fully understand how the fish works. Yeah you could compare the brain to a processor in terms of flops but we are talking about complexity not speed. The processor might seem complex but it is simple enough that a brain designed and developed it. One of my neurology lecturers once said that if the brain was simple enough for us to ever understand it then we would be too 'stupid' to understand it.
--
Legion
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
a paradox we have!