You should do some studying of modern fruit production. Most apples are man-made hybrids, and most of them don’t actually grow from seed—they’re propagated by clipping, or by grafting onto a different-species base. And there’s a TON of human technological activity in caring for the trees, harvesting the fruit, packing and preserving it for travel, and getting it to your house.
Some, of course, do grow from seed and give perfectly edible fruit. They’re about as efficient, compared to commercial apples, as horses are to cars. (edit for clarity: this is hyperbole. “natural” fruit trees are less consistent and less efficient in land and water use, but not by the same degree as a horse compared to a car).
So I maintain that the comments on your previous post are spot-on. We have exactly what you describe—a growable car is called a horse.
Also, it’s already the case that nobody knows how to make a car. There are so many steps involved that nobody can possibly understand them all.
wow… I definitely did not know we were that intense with making things artificial..
and I like that argument to draw a parallel with horses—quite convincing.
I’m really interested in the question of what’s the difference between human systems and things like ecosystems? There are definitely some advantages biological systems have—antifragility, adaptability, sustainability. On the other hand, as you point out, human-designed systems are more efficient, but at a more narrow task.
So are there structural lessons we could adapt from biological system designs? Or are we good where we are?
You should do some studying of modern fruit production. Most apples are man-made hybrids, and most of them don’t actually grow from seed—they’re propagated by clipping, or by grafting onto a different-species base. And there’s a TON of human technological activity in caring for the trees, harvesting the fruit, packing and preserving it for travel, and getting it to your house.
Some, of course, do grow from seed and give perfectly edible fruit. They’re about as efficient, compared to commercial apples, as horses are to cars. (edit for clarity: this is hyperbole. “natural” fruit trees are less consistent and less efficient in land and water use, but not by the same degree as a horse compared to a car).
So I maintain that the comments on your previous post are spot-on. We have exactly what you describe—a growable car is called a horse.
Also, it’s already the case that nobody knows how to make a car. There are so many steps involved that nobody can possibly understand them all.
wow… I definitely did not know we were that intense with making things artificial..
and I like that argument to draw a parallel with horses—quite convincing.
I’m really interested in the question of what’s the difference between human systems and things like ecosystems? There are definitely some advantages biological systems have—antifragility, adaptability, sustainability. On the other hand, as you point out, human-designed systems are more efficient, but at a more narrow task.
So are there structural lessons we could adapt from biological system designs? Or are we good where we are?