Jef's web files - Evolution of cooperation

Evolution of cooperation

Sun, 07 Mar 2004 10:27:35 -0500

Evolution of cooperation

Users Tinker With Google Maps to Provide Other Useful Data

Thu, 09 Jun 2005 10:22:56 -0400

Although not approved by the search company, information on crime, sexual predators and cheap gas prices is graphically displayed.

Tracking sexual predators in Florida. Guiding travelers to the cheapest gas. Pinpointing $ 1,500 studio apartments for rent in Manhattan.

Geeks, tinkerers and innovators are crashing the Google party, having discovered how to tinker with the search engine’s mapping service to graphically illustrate vital information that might otherwise be ignored, overlooked or not perceived as clearly.

Yahoo and other sites also offer maps, but Google Inc.’ s 4-month-old mapping service is more easily accessible and manipulated by outsiders, the tinkerers say.

All For One? Why Humans Cooperate

Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:31:34 -0500

Cooperation Makes Humans Unique, But Study Finds Most Are Reluctant Cooperators

Despite the fact that humans sometimes fight fiercely among themselves, one of our most distinctive human traits is our willingness to cooperate with others. Why we are like that is one of the really big questions confronting evolutionary psychologists.

"The fact that people cooperate is quite mysterious," says Robert Kurzban, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. "People are constantly talking about how organisms are competing, but one thing that humans do that's distinctive is they cooperate in groups."

Other animals, from ants to wolves, also cooperate to a degree, but not as extensively as humans. As evolutionary psychologists, Kurzban and Daniel Houser of George Mason University are trying to figure out why.

Testing Darwin

Mon, 14 Feb 2005 11:16:33 -0500

If you want to find alien life-forms, hold off on booking that trip to the moons of Saturn. You may only need to catch a plane to East Lansing, Michigan.

The aliens of East Lansing are not made of carbon and water. They have no DNA. Billions of them are quietly colonizing a cluster of 200computers in the basement of the Plant and Soil Sciences building at Michigan State University. To peer into their world, however, you have to walk a few blocks west on Wilson Road to the engineering department and visit the Digital Evolution Laboratory. Here you'll find a crew of computer scientists, biologists, and even a philosopher or two gazing at computer monitors, watching the evolution of bizarre new life-forms.

These are digital organisms-strings of commands-akin to computer viruses. Each organism can produce tens of thousands of copies of itself within a matter of minutes. Unlike computer viruses, however, they are made up of digital bits that can mutate in much the same way DNA mutates. A software program called Avida allows researchers to track the birth, life, and death of generation after generation of the digital organisms by scanning columns of numbers that pour down a computer screen like waterfalls.

After more than a decade of development, Avida's digital organisms are now getting close to fulfilling the definition of biological life. “More and more of the features that biologists have said were necessary for life we can check off,” says Robert Pennock, a philosopher at Michigan State and a member of the Avida team. “Does this, does that, does this. Metabolism? Maybe not quite yet, but getting pretty close.”

One thing the digital organisms do particularly well is evolve.“ Avida is not a simulation of evolution; it is an instance of it,” Pennock says. “All the core parts of the Darwinian process are there. These things replicate, they mutate, they are competing with one another. The very process of natural selection is happening there. If that's central to the definition of life, then these things count.”

Friendly foxes are cleverer

Tue, 08 Feb 2005 22:50:03 -0500

Domesticated foxes show evolution of social intelligence.

For almost half a century, a population of foxes in Siberia has been bred to be unafraid of humans and non-aggressive. Now these foxes seem to have shown that social skills come as a perk of being friendly.

Dogs, domesticated from their wild wolf cousins over millennia, are not only less likely to bite or bolt, but have also gained the ability to communicate with their human companions. For example, if a human points or looks at an object, the dog will also look at it.

Brian Hare, an anthropologist at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, had previously shown that dogs are more likely than undomesticated animals - even chimps - to be able to communicate in this way with humans. But was this social sophistication something that was specifically bred for during their domestication, or was it a by-product?

The evolution of everyday life

Fri, 13 Aug 2004 09:54:04 -0400

Co-operation has brought the human race a long way in a staggeringly short time

“Our everyday life is much stranger than we imagine, and rests on fragile foundations.” This is the intriguing first sentence of a very unusual new book about economics, and much else besides: “The Company of Strangers”, by Paul Seabright, a professor of economics at the University of Toulouse. (The book is published by Princeton University Press.) Why is everyday life so strange? Because, explains Mr Seabright, it is so much at odds with what would have seemed, as recently as 10,000 years ago, our evolutionary destiny. It was only then that “one of the most aggressive and elusive bandit species in the entire animal kingdom” decided to settle down. In no more than the blink of an eye, in evolutionary time, these suspicious and untrusting creatures, these “shy, murderous apes”, developed co-operative networks of staggering scope and complexity—networks that rely on trust among strangers. When you come to think about it, it was an extraordinarily improbable outcome.

Howard Rheingold's Latest Connection

Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:55:16 -0400

The tech guru sees a "new economic system" in the unconscious cooperation embodied by Google links and Amazon lists.

Howard Rheingold is on the hunt again. With his last book, Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution, in 2001, the longtime observer of technology trends made a persuasive case that pervasive mobile communications, combined with always-on Internet connections, will produce new kinds of ad-hoc social groups. Now, he's starting to take the leap beyond smart mobs, trying to weave some threads out of such seemingly disparate developments as Web logs, open-source software development, and Google.

At the same time, Rheingold is worried that established companies could quash such nascent innovations as file-sharing -- and potentially put the U.S. at risk of falling behind the rest of the world. He recently spoke with Robert D. Hof, BusinessWeek's Silicon Valley bureau chief. Here are excerpts from their conversation:

Q: Where do you see the social revolution you've been talking about going next?

A: It's too early to say. The question is: What does it point toward? Some kind of collective action...in which the individuals aren't consciously cooperating. A market is a great example as a mechanism for determining price based on demand. People aren't saying, "I'm contributing to the market," they say they're just selling something. But it adds up.

Animals reveal themselves to be dedicated followers of fashion

Mon, 26 Jul 2004 11:13:08 -0400

Being fashion-conscious is not confined to humans, research has shown.

Animals copy one another when making choices about places to live, where to eat and acquiring a mate.

Such behaviour allows the rapid transmission of non-genetic traits, giving rise to a form of "cultural evolution".

Researchers reviewed the evidence for animal fashion in the edition of the journal Science that appears today.

The team, led by Etienne Danchin, from the CNRS research institution in Paris, wrote: "Psychologists, economists and advertising moguls have long known that human decision-making is strongly influenced by the behaviour of others.

"A rapidly accumulating body of evidence suggests that the same is true in animals ... Public information can lead to cultural evolution, which we suggest may then affect biological evolution."

Emergence of Specialization from Global Optimizing Evolution in a Multi-Agent System

Sat, 10 Jul 2004 14:21:27 -0400

The evolution of specialization in a multi-agent system is studied both by computer simulation and Markov process model. Many individual agents search for and exploit resources to get global optimization in an environment without complete information. With the selection acting on agent specialization at the level of system and under the condition of increasing returns, the division of labor emerges as the results of long-term optimizing evolution. Mathematical analysis gives the optimum division of agents and a Markov chain model is proposed to describe the evolutionary dynamics. The results are in good agreement with that of simulation model.

Key Words: division of labor, evolutionary dynamics, multi-agent system, emergence.
Zengru Di, Jiawei Chen, Yougui Wang, and Zhangang Han
Department of Systems Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China

Digital evolution reveals the many ways to get to diversity

Sat, 03 Jul 2004 15:20:10 -0400

In finding an answer to “perhaps the greatest unsolved ecological riddle,” evolutionists propose that diversity is a testament to there being more than one way to make a living.

The riddle: Why are some habitats loaded with many more species than others?

The answer: Nature and evolution respect that there’s more than one way of doing things.

“What we’ve learned,” said Michigan State University scientist Charles Ofria, “is that if there isn’t just one way to succeed, you’ll see diversity.”

In an article published in the July 2 issue of Science, an interdisciplinary team of scientists at MSU, the California Institute of Technology and Keck Graduate Institute (KGI), with the help of powerful computers, has used a kind of artificial life, or ALife, to gain insight into questions of evolution.

Pulling Our Own Strings

Sun, 04 Apr 2004 17:08:48 -0400

Can there be freedom and free will in a deterministic world? Yes, declares the controversial philosopher Daniel C. Dennett. "Human freedom," he writes in his important new book Freedom Evolves (Viking), "is not an illusion; it is an objective phenomenon, distinct from all other biological conditions and found in only one species, us."

One might think that Dennett’s ringing endorsement of the reality of human freedom would make him popular with other intellectuals. It doesn’t. On the right, the conservative Weekly Standard denounces him as "a vigorous evangelist for evolutionary psychology." The neoconservative journal The Public Interest has called him "an evolutionary fundamentalist." That view was shared by the late left-wing evolutionary theorist Stephen Jay Gould, who disparaged Dennett as a "Darwinian fundamentalist." Gould’s scientific collaborator Niles Eldredge concurs, dismissing him as an "ultra-Darwinian." The liberal American Prospect accuses him of "cybernetic totalism."

But Dennett has his admirers too. The New York Times Book Review selected his Consciousness Explained as one of the 10 best books of 1991. The Wall Street Journal raved about 1995’s Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life, and declared that Dennett "does one of the things philosophers are supposed to be good at: clearing up conceptual muddles in the sciences." Zoologist Matt Ridley, author of The Origins of Virtue, hails him as the "ebullient, pugnacious and ever pithy sage of Boston."

Born in 1942, Daniel Dennett studied philosophy at Harvard University and Oxford University. His philosophical views can be traced most clearly to the influence of his Oxford teacher, philosopher Gilbert Ryle. Ryle famously attacked Cartesian mind-body dualism, dismissing it as the doctrine of "the ghost in the machine." Dennett is now the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and Director of the Center for Cognitive Studies at Tufts University.

Dennett has spent his intellectual career trying to extend the Enlightenment project of putting philosophy and morality on a scientific and naturalistic basis. In a sense, Dennett is updating David Hume in the light of Darwin’s theory of evolution. In doing so, he provides us with fascinating new ways to think about the meaning
of choice, the value of morality, and how the evolution of the human brain and its capabilities has made us more free.

Indeed, Dennett argues that human freedom is dramatically expanding. Language and culture, especially when abetted by modern science and technology, enable us to increase the range of our choices. As our understanding of our genes and brains increases, he believes we will increase our freedom rather than limit it. We will be able to prevent and cure more diseases, improve our social institutions, and even enhance human capabilities. He says that we defend freedom, especially political freedom, because among other things it enables people to make better and better choices over time. As important, Dennett maintains that to whatever extent we were ever at the mercy of our genes and biological evolution, we no longer are. Instead our genes are now at the mercy of our brains.
Reason Science Correspondent Ronald Bailey interviewed Dennett in February.

"Elegance is more than just a frill in life..."

Sun, 04 Apr 2004 14:39:31 -0400

Elegance is more than just a frill in life; it is one of the driving criteria behind survival.
- Douglas Hofstadter

Evolving Artificial Moral Ecologies

Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:39:10 -0500

At The Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia Peter Danielson, Principal Investigator William Harms Ph.D., Faculty Research Associate

...and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.

Wed, 07 Sep 2005 21:46:20 -0400

If a man prevails against one who is alone, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.
- Ecclesiastes 4:12

"That would be a good idea."

Sun, 27 Jun 2004 12:18:40 -0400

That would be a good idea.
- Gandhi (when asked what he thought of western civilisation)