His description of the concept starts 31 minutes in.
His description of how computers help to design the next generation of computers starts 36 minutes in.
He also uses the term “take off”.
If you have much of an understanding of this sort of thing, a lot of the material on this site about rapid transitions and the associated risks can be seen as being a confused muddle—based on a misunderstanding of the history of the field. Dawkins is correct. We have been seeing self-improvement for millennia now.
I’ve been explaining this point here for a while now. Nobody seems to have a coherent critique. I remain rather puzzled about why people persist in taking this kind of material seriously.
Dawkins understood the self-improving nature of modern computer technology in 1991 - see:
“The Genesis of Purpose”—http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qm-0Z0ceezQ
He called it “self-feeding co-evolution”.
His description of the concept starts 31 minutes in.
His description of how computers help to design the next generation of computers starts 36 minutes in.
He also uses the term “take off”.
If you have much of an understanding of this sort of thing, a lot of the material on this site about rapid transitions and the associated risks can be seen as being a confused muddle—based on a misunderstanding of the history of the field. Dawkins is correct. We have been seeing self-improvement for millennia now.
I’ve been explaining this point here for a while now. Nobody seems to have a coherent critique. I remain rather puzzled about why people persist in taking this kind of material seriously.