Evolution (was: code review)

Discussion in 'Python' started by Ian Kelly, Jul 3, 2012.

  1. Ian Kelly

    Ian Kelly Guest

    On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Rick Johnson
    <> wrote:
    > I am reminded of a story: A few years back a very nice old woman
    > offered to give me her typewriter. She said: "i might need to type a
    > letter one day and it would good to have around". It was a nice
    > typewriter for 1956, but she had no idea her little "machine" was
    > reduced to no less than a paper weight thanks to something called the
    > PC. Her machine had been extinct for decades. Effectually, SHE had
    > been extinct for decades.


    It's called "retirement", not "extinction", and there's nothing at all
    wrong with typing out letters; it's just slower. If we ever have a
    nuclear war or even just get hit by a large enough coronal mass
    ejection, you might find yourself wishing you had that typewriter
    instead of your suddenly useless laptop -- just as the dinosaurs (had
    they been sentient) might have found themselves wishing they had not
    evolved to be so darn *large* 65 million years ago.

    > When i hear people like Chris evangelizing about slavish syntax, i am
    > reminded of the nice old lady. Her intentions where virtuous, however
    > her logic was flawed. She is still clinging to old technology. Like
    > the Luddites she refuses to see the importance technological
    > advancements. And by harboring this nostalgia she is actually
    > undermining the future evolution of an entire species.


    That's not nostalgia; that's lack of necessity. There is nothing so
    "important" about technological advancement that it must be thrust
    upon nice old ladies who have set habits and no good reason to change
    them. And I can't see for the life of me how people failing to jump
    on the email bandwagon have anything at all to do with evolution.

    > Lifespans are limited for a very important evolutionary reason!


    If that is true, then when your singularity finally arrives and we all
    become immortal, will that not interfere with evolution?

    All kidding aside, evolution is a natural process, not a purpose. The
    ultimate point of evolution will occur when the universe is no longer
    entropically able to support life in any form, transcended or
    otherwise, and we will all finally be extinct. Then what? The
    universe just carries on without us, and goes through a whole series
    of cosmological epochs that will be observed by nobody at all, for far
    longer than the entirety of our brief, chaotic existence. It's often
    suggested that the Big Bang is the cause of our existence, but the Big
    Bang is much bigger than us. The Big Bang is like a rock thrown into
    a still pond. First there is a big splash, then there are some
    ripples, and after a short time the pond becomes boringly still again.
    We aren't really part of the pond; we're just riding the ripples, and
    when they vanish, so do we.

    You made the claim once in another thread that individuals are not
    important in the grand scheme of things (I disagree; from our limited
    societal vantage point, individuals *are* the grand scheme of things).
    I am trying here to demonstrate the point that the universe doesn't
    care one whit about evolution either. Hopefully I succeeded, because
    I don't want to get sucked into another huge, completely off-topic
    thread, and so I won't be posting on this again.
     
    Ian Kelly, Jul 3, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Volodymyr Sadovyy

    Code write \ code review productivity

    Volodymyr Sadovyy, Apr 23, 2004, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    798
    Roedy Green
    Apr 25, 2004
  2. Otto Wyss
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    462
    Robert Vazan
    Sep 7, 2003
  3. andrew blah
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    374
    andrew blah
    Oct 17, 2004
  4. Josiah Carlson
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    365
    Andrew Clover
    Oct 13, 2004
  5. www
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    1,519
Loading...

Share This Page