Comment: Something Old-school Geeky (Score 3, Informative) 465
Comment: Re:This is not a "genetic algorithm" (Score 1) 326
I agree. I'm not sure it's even hill climbing in a follow-the-gradient sense, since a gradient is never computed. It's more of an optimized random walk. The overall performance would surely improve if a true, Holland-inspired GA involving both mutation and crossover on a large population were employed.
Another concern is the size of the polygons. If they are allowed to increase in complexity (i.e. by adding vertices), it's uncertain what the program really demonstrates. It'd be like starting with an amoeba and producing a chimpanzie by adding codons to its genome one-by-one and rewarding matches to the known chimpanzie DNA sequence. I'd have been more impressed if the "genotype" had been constrained to 250 triangles, say, and not allowed to increase in complexity along the way.
One feature of this demonstration does stand out as inspired, however: the use of semitransparency in the polygons. A couple of the intermediate renditions have a Cubist flavor to them in the style of Picasso or Gris. This I find to be more intriguing than the final result!