Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion - Biology Lab

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Mabus — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 18:00:11 +0000

@steve yeah i assume writing a compleate metabolic reaction for a compleate organism top down is quiet the challange. Not sure if self corectin feedback loops make it more difficult or easy, since i experience on my own how unexpected side effects can trow unpredicted stuff out of balance. Sure once they are self balancing, it works neatly, but the moment it is to much out of control, it starts getting into a feedbback loop that won't stop.

But don't forget to work like nature, good enough until reproductive age is all we need....

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Steve Grand — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 16:33:43 +0000

@genesis Yeah, not your fault. I didn't understand what happened, at first. I need to find some time to look into this forum plugin - I just grabbed it and added it. I can't seem to keep up with it all at the moment - got my head down fretting about metabolic reactions! But once I get a build out I'll make sure everything is configured correctly.

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Mabus — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 08:51:04 +0000

@steve i just clickes "reply"

and since i look at my highscore the number and names of new members ariving daily, i noticed many use their email as their name here. Seems something in the regestry is confusing? Maybe a little line saying "don't place your email here" might solve that?

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Squirrel — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 07:40:14 +0000

@steve @genesis @anyoneelsereading

I found a way to change it by going through the forum, it was my handle at the time @genesis posted. My fault for not noticing my handle and username were different, I probably missed a box during the signup process and it defaulted.

Thanks guys for fixing the posts!

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Steve Grand — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 03:00:41 +0000

I hadn't noticed my handle was default set to my actual email, is there a way to turn that off?

It isn't! You're @squirrel according to the forum and the rest of the site. I don't even know how @genesis would have got hold of your email. Plus it was spelled with dashes instead of dots. Only @squirrel shows up in your forum profile. How did you find this, @genesis?

Luckily I am a super-wizard and have edited the posts!

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Squirrel — Wed, 12 Nov 2025 20:46:34 +0000

I hadn't noticed my handle was default set to my actual email, is there a way to turn that off? Also in the meantime please avoid tagging me by it, otherwise it'll stay on the forum. thx

Doesn't matter when there's just a few of us, but might be a problem as the site grows

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Mabus — Wed, 12 Nov 2025 20:37:52 +0000

@squirrel since we will have to share the creatures across different players, we will get lot's of chaos because we will be a community..

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Squirrel — Sun, 09 Nov 2025 09:04:41 +0000

I'm more interested in selective breeding and semi-feral runs (maybe introducing some unusual selective pressures to see where it goes) than gene editing, though that may be my general laziness in terms of not wanting to learn how to do it!

Also I'm just drawn to chaos. If I gene edit something I know what I'm going to get. With selective breeding, even though you are trying to push in a particular direction there's the potential for surprise.

RE: Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Mabus — Sat, 13 Sep 2025 10:43:20 +0000

with steves original biochenical aproach, i was looking forward to creating the most optimised keta creature possible. However since we are using a creatures style biochemestry instead, making a meta creature will be way to easy. Meaning creating interesting flaws and quirks will be the main goal.

And my aproach in creatures was always reusing older moddified ones to build uppon it and i always hated it when i had to go back ti generation zero, that's why i really like the idea if a continous population. That will allow for real progress without constant resets. No matter if natural or man made insetions. And i assume we need an dual aproach with some "fixes" when players remove the genes for imortality and similar that will pop up in natural evolution. Because pure natural evolution in creatures always created fast aging egg producing imortals if i give them enough time/generations

Natural Selection versus Artificial Insertion

Finnius — Sat, 13 Sep 2025 00:38:21 +0000

So I thought I would bring up this topic just to sort of feel out the crowd on how they feel about "natural breeding and selection" versus "artificial insertion".

Obviously this represents two huge camps. I belong to the 'natural' crowd in that discovering and propogating certain genotypes via normal breeding cycles and forced 'studs and bitches'...while there is another camp that is excited to create and insert 'meta-creatures' via external modification/injection of genes. I know that this current strain of Steve's are much more complicated that prior iterations (possibly on purpose...don't ask me, ask Steve) but thoughts would be interesting from both camps.