Re:'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists
by nooneelse on Thursday May 20, 2010 @06:17PM
(#1365636)
That use maybe should have been "simulated life" all along, so as to be more exact. This is a living organism that is artificially made, "artificial life" applies to it just as much as the other subject. Though the more specific terms that capture the way in which their somethings are artificial are good too.
Re:'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists
by jamesbritt on Thursday May 20, 2010 @08:18PM
(#1365950)
'This is a living organism that is artificially made, "artificial life" applies to it just as much as the other subject.'
Maybe. But if you end up with a living organism, then that it's not artificial life; it's life (albeit artificially manufactured) . Whereas the software stuff is never anything but artificial.
Long run I'd expect anything that's alive to be called life, regardless of the process that lead to it.
Re:'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists
by aheilbut on Thursday May 20, 2010 @10:30PM
(#1366182)
The field actually does typically call itself "synthetic biology," rather than "artificial life".
Re:'Artificial life' breakthrough announced by scientists
by amalcon on Thursday May 20, 2010 @10:02PM
(#1366134)
Are we sure that the CS term predates the biological term? I mean, we might not have really succeeded in creating (biological) artificial life in the 1950's, but someone was almost certainly trying.
It's related to genetic algorithms, genetic programming, and the like.
It would be nice if the using-real-chemicals-and-alive-stuff hacking were called "synthetic life", or something to distinguish it from existing terminology.