<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Multiplicative Updates in Coordination Games and the Theory of Evolution · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1208.3160/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1208.3160/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Multiplicative Updates in Coordination Games and the Theory of Evolution — mentioned by j2kun</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7796629</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1208.3160:7796629</guid><pubDate>Sun, 25 May 2014 16:05:22 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;GA has nothing to do with evolution? Now I am thoroughly confused. GA is inspired by natural selection. If you program your algorithm to mimic natural selection then of course it&amp;#x27;s related to evolution, and if you don&amp;#x27;t then it&amp;#x27;s no longer a GA. Maybe your point is that the GA community has taken their snake oil so far away from this that they&amp;#x27;re not even using natural selection anymore? If you want to study GAs, and you want to avoid the snake oil, what would you do? Selling it as studying the mathematics of natural selection seems like a good idea to me. I&amp;#x27;m not saying that&amp;#x27;s…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1208.3160/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.GT</category></item></channel></rss>
