this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2025
100 points (99.0% liked)

technology

24031 readers
250 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If good replicator is just being defined as personally producing a whole bunch of offspring, then I think it's just not a helpful term. A good replicator should be something that replicates effectively, not just a lot, and what you are describing as "less effective at replication" is clearly more effective at replication relatively speaking if its offspring are still around and its competitors are not. You would hardly say something is a good replicator if it produced an unfathomable amount of offspring and then just ate them all, right?

I'm also saying that replication isn't essential to the self-maintaining process on the individual level

How is this relevant? No one was contradicting this idea, even implicitly, it's just not a meaningful factor in the discussion for the reason you go on to note.