[ExI] Smarter mice

[Dan]

On Dec 11, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 3:11 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> If we can design an organic (and inheritable) gland/device to receive radio waves (or some other frequency) then what need have we of inorganics?  I do think it's likely the inorganic link will come first, but you are right - what evidence do I have?  Ha!
> 
> Consider also which one works better.  Biology is infamously messy, the result of compromises and constraints of a certain production method that is not an absolute requirement for future designs.  Computers and software may be complex but they are, at some level, the result of conscious designs.

But some of it is unplanned or spontaneous, no? For instance, the progress of technology itself is the result of planned and spontaneous elements, no? If not, then someone could simply plan out the whole future development and there'd be not surprises, right? Not trying to get too Hayekian here. ;)

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141212/5c015764/attachment.html>