this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
87 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
59374 readers
7033 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
nature hasnt reaally solved the replication problem (cancers). but we will? i guess its possible.
Who says nature isn't cool with cancer? Nature don't give a fuck.
Natures answer to cancer is to let it happen. Just like every other disease.
The way it eradicates it, is that we eventually all die of it, and the few that survive live on to have immunity. It takes an extremely long time. The major problem is, things like cancer usually happen well beyond the point that we start reproducing.
Evolution doesn’t really care about things beyond the point of reproduction. I mean, it kinda does, but not in the same way that dropping dead in childhood does.
Not to mention, humans are actively meddling in evolution. Diseases that would wipe us out are handled with technology now. Meaning we have taken control of a lot of what nature used to do.
nature cared enough to put a lot of effort into error correction preventing it.but youre right, just enough to keep'em coming
Nature didn't care, it was just an happy accident, a mutation that gave an advantage over others who couldn't correct errors in replication. So they remained and others died away.
Seeing compression, data decay, cosmic radiation flipping bit, I'm not too confident