<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Random Idea: Trees as Networks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/</link>
	<description>Politics, Programming and Possibilities</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:48:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Micah</title>
		<link>http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/#comment-14404</link>
		<dc:creator>Micah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Aug 2007 19:09:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/#comment-14404</guid>
		<description>Hackers really would really need to "hack" at plants to get into secure networks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hackers really would really need to &#8220;hack&#8221; at plants to get into secure networks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shalev</title>
		<link>http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/#comment-14320</link>
		<dc:creator>Shalev</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 15:19:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/#comment-14320</guid>
		<description>Actually, it's the other way around.  It's probably easier create a form of networked tree than it is to eradicate all the "bugs" from our genome.

Nevertheless, in order to implement something this grandiose, you'd have to significantly hack the genome.  In order to have anything approaching a decent transfer speed, the trees would need to manufacture their own nanotubes (carbon's easier than metal anyway) and line their entire root structure with them.

Now that I think of it, you don't want a tree, you want mushrooms.  Mushrooms are actually enormous underground organisms that occasionally send out the little bells we call mushrooms.  That kind of system already has the distributed network in place.  All you would need to do was optimize it for data communications (ie. through nanotube lined roots).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, it&#8217;s the other way around.  It&#8217;s probably easier create a form of networked tree than it is to eradicate all the &#8220;bugs&#8221; from our genome.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, in order to implement something this grandiose, you&#8217;d have to significantly hack the genome.  In order to have anything approaching a decent transfer speed, the trees would need to manufacture their own nanotubes (carbon&#8217;s easier than metal anyway) and line their entire root structure with them.</p>
<p>Now that I think of it, you don&#8217;t want a tree, you want mushrooms.  Mushrooms are actually enormous underground organisms that occasionally send out the little bells we call mushrooms.  That kind of system already has the distributed network in place.  All you would need to do was optimize it for data communications (ie. through nanotube lined roots).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Robeck</title>
		<link>http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/#comment-14277</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Robeck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2007 22:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.inquirylabs.com/2007/08/08/random-idea-trees-as-networks/#comment-14277</guid>
		<description>Wonderful idea! This line of thinking reminds me of Freeman Dyson in his essay "The World, the Flesh and the Devil" (&lt;i&gt;The Scientist As Rebel&lt;/i&gt;). I highly recommend it.

I think our long-term survival as a species will require genetic alteration (artificial evolution) both of our species and of others we depend on. The ethical implications of this are complex, of course.

My own thinking is that while it will soon be possible to eliminate most deleterious traits from the human genome, the creation of &lt;i&gt;new&lt;/i&gt; DNA (such as networked trees) is probably beyond human capabilities. 

I await the development of a self-evolving artificial intelligence -- i.e., a machine intelligent enough to design even more complex artificial intelligence. Within a few short machine generations, networked trees -- or the biological colonization of space envisioned by Dyson -- could become a reality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wonderful idea! This line of thinking reminds me of Freeman Dyson in his essay &#8220;The World, the Flesh and the Devil&#8221; (<i>The Scientist As Rebel</i>). I highly recommend it.</p>
<p>I think our long-term survival as a species will require genetic alteration (artificial evolution) both of our species and of others we depend on. The ethical implications of this are complex, of course.</p>
<p>My own thinking is that while it will soon be possible to eliminate most deleterious traits from the human genome, the creation of <i>new</i> DNA (such as networked trees) is probably beyond human capabilities. </p>
<p>I await the development of a self-evolving artificial intelligence &#8212; i.e., a machine intelligent enough to design even more complex artificial intelligence. Within a few short machine generations, networked trees &#8212; or the biological colonization of space envisioned by Dyson &#8212; could become a reality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
