> Nope. You are comparing apples and orangutangs. See my other post for > why there would be no 'selection' taking place. I am sure there is a > system that could be created the way you explain here, but that system > would not be as good as the system I describe. In some ways it could be > better, by orders of magnitude, but my system would be error free. I see your point about apples and orangutangs and I agree. But I think that your system is less likely to be developed precisely because it will have no techniques for innovation. Selection is the best way to search for new ideas since it is an iterative process that explores "idea space" (to paraphrase Dennett).
As to the specifics of your specs for the system: My only question (and one which I am inadequate to answer) has to do with Goedel's theorem. Would not your system run into questions for which there are no logical answers and would that not throw it into one of those Star Trek "Does not compute" loops with eventual self-destruction associated with tacky smoke special effects? That is there are some problems for which there are no mathematical or logical solutions. So the machine could not achieve the sort of perfection that you describe. > FYI all this discussion is not really off topic. The uplift universe has > machine intelligence's (computer civilizations and just ordinary > computers). And the book _Earth_ had a lot to do with stuff too.
