[thethirdwheel]

My background is in bioinformatics, so this naturally caught my eye. I came away disappointed. The mappings are no easier to understand than simplistic descriptions in biology textbooks. The only thing they add is the mistaken impression of intent in the genetic code, and the expectation the analogy will continue to hold outside the scope of the enumerated mappings. Kind of ironic to run into that issue with so many Dawkins references at the end...

[benched]

Surely mappings onto programming concepts can provide a different kind of understanding to programmers than biology textbooks. I'm kind of appalled by the anti-cross-disciplinary attitude displayed on HN sometimes. (Like the recent 'This guy's a physicist. He should shut up about a.i.' in regards to David Deutsch.)