2013
Another pop science truism hits the, er, pop science truism pile
From The Scientist: Science is “an elitist sport now”?
Sexual harassment at Scientific American?
Quote of the Day
“. . . even an infinity of universes would amount, ontologically speaking, to an infinity of unnecessary contingencies, an infinite reiteration of the mystery of existence.” David Bentley Hart (emphasis in the original)
The First Church of Christ of the Big Bang?
Beginning of universe betrays “the very foundations of science”?
The Big Bang: How did one of the best attested theories in science become so unpopular?
L.A. Times starts banning opposing views from letters page
Out of the mouths of infants
A sample for you of one of the products of unguided, undesigned, blind forces, working together for the survival of genes, with no objective meaning or purpose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhcZ6b2FSsk Can we get a meme going here? If you’ve got a blog/Facebook/Twitter etc., then post your example!
Why doesn’t software industry use evolution?
Industry is constantly searching for technologies to maximize profits and minimize costs. Software industry is no exception (the world software market exceeded $300 billion). Actually some computers can process quadrillions floating-point operations per second (10^15 flops). It would be technically possible to implement on such computers the paradigm of unguided evolution (random variation + selection) for obtaining new programs by randomly modifying old programs. So, why software houses pay legions of human programmers to develop ex-novo applications when an automatic process could do the job? They could save truckloads of money by automatizing, at least in large part if not in toto, the software development work flow. To have an idea, let’s perform two simplified calculations about the speed of Read More ›