Maurice Barnhill  wrote in message
news:...
> John Eastmond wrote:
>  > I would be interested in comments about the following little computer
>  > "simulation" of the effect of sexual reproduction on
individuals'
>  > "complexity".
>  >



> If you
> called C "simplicity" it would still increase, with the opposite
> implication.

Indeed.  This thread reminded me of something similar:-

Imagine a situation where you are presented with two boxes, one of
which contains an amount of money x, the other containing 2x, with x
unknown to you.  You get to pick a box, and take the contents as your
winnings.  Say you pick the box on the left, and are then asked
whether you wish to stick with this choice or switch to the other.  If
you stick, then your winnings will be y.  If you change, then with
probability 0.5 your winnings will be 0.5y, but with probability 0.5
they will be 2y.  On average, then, changing to the box on the right
will win you (0.5y + 2y)/2 which is 1.25y.  Which is greater than y,
so you should switch to the box on the right.  So why didn't you pick
the box on the right in the first place?  :)
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 7/25/03 8:39:25 PM