>>Honestly I go a few to crisis, when I think about the code produced by a "genetic program":
>>the bug is in the genetics that describes the genetic program
>>or it is in the genetics of the mind that he has written the genetic program.
>>If the genetic program now produces another genetic program,...
>
>...then you have evolution, not design. Since there's no specified designed feature to achieve, whatever evolves is bug-free, because bug is the difference between expected and produced behavior. No expectation, no bug :).

Hey, this thread is hijacked by philosophers! Great, I jump in. (Oh, that's impossible because I'm the Creator. Anyway...)

Suppose God was merely a programmer, like we are, in a previous civilization... Let's call him (her? nah.. most programmers are men, just teasing) John.

Now the big quest is whether John designed the evolution idea or just simply made a mistake and introduced a bug, no, many bugs. So, did John have this fantastic idea to design a program that would generate slightly different programs that would generate slightly different programs, and so on, and that some programs would survive better than others and thus would generate better offsprings? And was that an appealing idea to John? Or did he intend to design the perfect program that would generate equally perfect programs? I can't see this as appealing, by the way, rather as boring.

Anyway, we can't ask this to John himself, because he's dead by now, for sure. It's all so long ago...