> We appear to disagree on the boundary between "simple" and "complex".
> I place a desktop-sized supercomputer factory in the "simple" category.
> I can't tell for sure, but you seem to disagree? It would be fun to
> rank-order a set of parts or devices and see where each of us places
> the boundary. We could each place the rank-ordered devices on a timeline,
> except we both agree that a breakthrough is needed, more or less implying a
> bimodal distribution.
A list of stuff ranked from "simple" to "complex"
Real Simple:
thread
fabric
rods
macro-scale diamond structural modules
-- from diamond 2x4s to diamond screws and nuts
Simple:
solid, complex shapes
-- furniture, building modules, hand tools, many household utensils,
device casings
Pretty Simple:
micromachine components
-- gears, pistons, etc.
macromachine components
-- gears, pistons, etc.
Mildly Complex:
simple machines
-- electric motors, gear assemblies, lever complexes
Complex:
common machines
-- pumps, complete transmissions
Moderately Complex
multi-component devices
-- disc drives, simple engines, simple chemical processors, digestible
food
Damned Complex
advanced machines
-- "planes, trains and automobiles", pallatable food
Hellishly Complex
Machine systems
-- robots, factories, appetizing food, people
Greg Burch <Gburch1@aol.com>----<burchg@liddellsapp.com>
Attorney ::: Director, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
"Good ideas are not adopted automatically. They must
be driven into practice with courageous impatience."