RE: [-empyre-] tangent: software / conceptual art

> Self modifying code was a popular strategy of the early (pre Dewdney
> and Redcode) Code Wars.  Competing programs would rewrite their own
> code and some could steal and adapt their opponents code.  Code Wars
> began in the 60's and was an early pre-cursor of alife (and viruses).
> This was about the same time that Holland published his papers on
> adaptive strategies (in 1962) - the root of today's evolutionary and
> genetic algorithms and a major taproot of alife.

Very interesting, thanks for that and the links.

Yes, to think, as Florian does, that:

"{5: No computer can reprogram itself; self-programming is only possible
within a limited framework of game rules written by a human programmer. A
machine can behave differently than expected, because the rules didn't
foresee all situations they could create, but no machine can overwrite its
own rules by itself.}"

is a misunderstanding of the nature of computers and what they are capable
of. There is no proof, and there is very likely never to be any--popular
falacies from Penrose not withstanding--that the processes which computers
are capable of are any less flexible than thought itself. Were Florian's
statement true, it would demonstrate that there's a thought process
(self-modification) of which humans are capable and computers are not. But
it isn't so. It does seem that this sort of misunderstanding is widespread
and often fondly held.


This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.