I would agree if fitness is the only requirement.
but it is not there is also the requirement of efficiency, and for that the only path is growth.
Over the long-term, fitness is the only way to maximize "progress" (a.k.a. "growth").
It doesn't matter if you like it or not, nature's free market will steamroll any attempts to control or order (i.e. top-down control) it.
Shrimps have more deggrees of freedom but that will not help them when the whale scoops them.
shrimps have greater degree of freedom but but whales outlive them by far.
Simpleton minds think degrees-of-freedom only applies to 3D spacial movement.
Degrees-of-freedom applies to all possible events, including the freedom to think, live long, etc..
That efficiency can only be achieved with growth and scaling up, which of course limits degrees of freedom and can cause extinction events.
Cripes you are still ignorant of the salient point of the opening post of this thread— that the Industrial Age required economies-of-scale because of the high fixed capital component of production (e.g. factories) whereas the Knowledge Age scales decentralized because the most significant cost of production is now the individual's knowledge.
Network effects provide the symbiosis scaling in the Knowledge Age, e.g. someone writes some open source which gains enough following and maturity that I can reuse it in a project I am doing and then my open source project gains enough following and maturity that others can reuse...
...The untapped entropy in
Reed's law is astronomical.
So in the end do you accept that agents are systems that are threatened by internal entropy accumulation or not?
Nonsense. If I don't reply to your nonsense again, let this post serve as a hint as to why I am ignoring you.
even with a multitude agents if they do not seek to diversify aka mutate (coincube argument) you still have the entropy of one, numbers do not protect you from monoculture. And if we see the current merits of the silicon valley this is what one observes monoculture.
You don't make any sense because CoinCube's argument is that too much mutation can be unstable, but CoinCube's strawman is inapplicable as I explained.
as to networks
a clique has max network effect but 0 entropy
Hey mathematical idiot, go study Reed's law of exponential scaling of network utility. A clique can't scale exponentially dimwit. What dimwit would think a single monoculture (clique) could scale exponentially to be maximally connected to all humans on earth.
I will not feed him by replying further to his off-topic nonsense. He can't seem to grasp that I wasn't writing about monoculture nor any of his nonsense thinking. As if the Silicon Valley reflects the culture of the entire world, or the future global Knowledge Age.
For example, the
Hoverbike wasn't Kickstarted in the Silicon Valley.