neurons, actuators, sensors, differentiators, PIDs

[speculative] "The sequence showed some small creature's fossils over a long stretch of time, tens of millions of years. What was striking was how non-random the changes were. The bones got thicker and longer and moved around a bit in relation to each other, but they were clearly the same bones changing shape and size through a continuum. It was only some years later that I came across the concept of genetic drift and was struck with the idea that I had been looking at the "swimming" phase of E. coli reorganization. The sequence ended either when that species became extinct -- or when there was a tumble and it turned to a different direction of development and became some new species."

"So what I'm proposing, to sum up, is that evolution actually works by the E. coli method and not by the random-jump method that has always been assumed. The only reason the random-jump method has seemed to work with models is that the models, inadvertently, actually use something close to the E. coli method. They give credit for moving toward a goal-state known to the programmer but (supposedly) not to the test organism, and only that fact can account for their success."

"The Reinforcement button runs a model of dot movement that is equivalent to the natural selection model. The Control button runs a model of dot movement that is equivalent to the E. coli reorganization model of natural selection. The demo stops when the dot reaches the target or when the simulation has run for a threshold amount of iterations. The Control model always gets the dot to the target; the Reinforcement model rarely does, but sometimes the dot does get to the target by chance.

But if I let the simulation keep running indefinitely, the Control model would keep the dot on the target once it got it there for as long as the simulation ran; the Reinforcement model might eventually get the dot to hit the target but the dot would soon drift away from the target if the simulation kept running.

The evolutionary analog is that the target is an environmental niche to which the population (dot) is adapting. The changes in direction of movement of the dot are the phenotypic changes resulting from genetic mutation. The success of a mutation is measured in terms of the resulting direction of movement of the dot relative to the target; a "good" mutation is one which results in the dot moving toward the target. In the Reinforcement model the probability of a particular movement direction (mutation) becomes more probable if it produces a "good" result (survives longer). In the Control (E. coli) model the probability of a mutation (change in direction) decreases in proportion to whether the current direction is moving the dot closer or farther from the target."

A quote from "The Psychological Foundations of Culture"

sapolsky, skip first 5 min.

"Humans, Wrangham says, are as adapted to cooked food as cows are to grass.

These adaptations are both physical and psychological. Why do women still end up doing more housework than men? Why are so many instances of domestic violence triggered by apparent or perceived failures in the preparation and ready provision of food? Wrangham believes that human monogamy evolved as a protection racket, in which males ensure that their vulnerable stove-tending spouses don’t get their food stolen."

""The more financially independent a woman is, the more likely she is to choose a partner based on looks than bank balance" lulz. yes, a lot of rich women are marrying poor but hot men. or wait..

Evolution, or rather, our genes - don't give a shit about our personal happiness, your goals or our success. We're 'designed' to survive and reproduce. Use your willpower to set-up habits and an environment that is success augmenting. External structures, social environment / tribe, a code of behavior, written goals. Things outside (environment) > things inside (mind). Thinking that you're 100% free to act however you want results in guilt. You're a slave, a slave to your genes, your environment and your subconscious beliefs. Failure to achieve your personal goals is normal.

"Hey, no one ever said that changing the world and getting shit done was going to be emotionally uplifting." :)

interview with Gregory Cochran (the 10,000 year explosion) and razib khan from GNXP

"In addition, we propose a simple method for estimating the level of paternity uncertainty from kin investment data; application of this method to our data on aunts and uncles suggests that between 13% and 20% of children are not the offspring of their putative father."