Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity • Hacker News Board

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#131

Post by vijayr » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 1:33 PM UTC

elwesties wrote: post #44

Tiktaalik wrote: post #16

> In line with this, several decades of observation show that orcas are not naturally violent towards humans. There are no recorded cases of a wild orca killing a human. In a recent BBC Attenborough documentary (I think Frozen Planet) there was a sequence where they showed teams of killer whales swiftly swimming just under the surface to create a wave in an attempt to knock a seal off an ice flow so that they could e…

I have personally swum with wild Orcas. They seemed to asses me then discount me as food fairly quickly.

Is it because humans have less fat than seals etc, that they are not interested in us as food?

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#132

Post by vijayr » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 1:37 PM UTC

azakai wrote: post #49

funkyy wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attacks on humans by Orcas happens. Its that they do not eat humans, once they realize its us, they let go and swim away. They need to taste us first, especially if none of the members of group haven't tasted or interacted with humans before.

It's not just that they don't eat us, it's also that they haven't killed us for other reasons. For example, a human happening to stray close to a young orca might be confused as a threat to it, which could trigger an attack by a parent. Yet, despite there being lots of orcas in the ocean, no violent altercation between a wild orca and a human has led to a human death. That this hasn't happened even once is remarkable…

Are hippos a good example? They are crazy territorial, have a nasty temper and will take on any animal that stray into their area. Orcas aren't territorial.

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#133

Post by eveningcoffee » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 2:02 PM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #126

DanBC wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're ever in a situation where you get a choice of which finger to lose don't chose your little finger. You want to keep your index (or first) finger, and your little (or forth) finger, and you probably want to keep your ring (or third) finger. A bunch of stuff becomes much harder if you don't have a little finger.

Doing pottery I primarily use my middle fingers and thumbs ... could you share your reasoning?

Your grip becomes much weaker.

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#134

Post by pbhjpbhj » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 2:27 PM UTC

eveningcoffee wrote: post #133

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing pottery I primarily use my middle fingers and thumbs ... could you share your reasoning?

Your grip becomes much weaker.

Is it weaker or just more difficult to apply the strength? I can crush things between middle-finger and thumb more easily than between little-finger and thumb suggesting that the grip is stronger in the first case. Not trying to be pedantic; just interested in body mechanics.

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#135

Post by cookiecaper » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 4:11 PM UTC

ProAm wrote: post #92

cphoover wrote: post #24

I agree that killer whale's shouldn't be kept in captivity, but than on the other hand, I also love me some bacon. Pigs are also sentient creatures with high intelligence yet we see them as a food source, and thus don't really care about their conditions in captivity.

It's different for animals that naturally migrate hundreds of thousands of miles a year and forcing them to live in a few thousand cubic meters of water.

Why? Can't they swim hundreds of miles within their enclosures, just as humans can walk hundreds of miles on the treadmill? Is the primary complaint that the orca won't be able to enjoy the scenery of the open ocean, and thus, will no longer find joy in its "migration"? This is the main reason some humans prefer to run outdoors instead of in the gym on the treadmill.

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#136

Post by cookiecaper » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 4:33 PM UTC

zipwitch wrote: post #14

jqm wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what point does sentience end? Whales? Rats? Birds? Fish? Insects? Plants? Bacteria? Because something has a higher order nervous system does that mean we have to assign it equal rights? How high an order of system would be required to have equal rights? Why does it really matter how something else feels other than members of our own species? For the record I generally agree with not keeping killer whales in capti…

I've no idea where we can draw a line on "sentience". But when it comes to creatures that seem highly likely to be on the same side of the line that we are, I think its far better to err by being too generous with our definitions.

No animal is even close to anything approaching human intelligence. Apes are the most human-like animal we know, but there's no push against keeping them in zoos. They're too ugly, so it wouldn't play well.

Animals have a greatly inhibited sense of consciousness and continuity. They deserve respect as a resource, but they don't deserve "rights" of any kind.

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#137

Post by logfromblammo » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

Synaesthesia wrote: post #123

logfromblammo wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find your reference to "concentration camps" in relation to livestock finishing feedlots and slaughterhouses to be tremendously inappropriate. Please find another way to shock and horrify readers into treating food animals more humanely. It might not have been your intent, but you are reducing the victims of actual concentration camps to the status of food animals.

I think it's correct, in fact livestock farms are worse than most concentration camps.

Except that their purpose is not human genocide.

If you do indeed believe that battery farming of livestock for meat production is worse than human genocide, we cannot have a rational conversation about ethics or animal rights, as we do not agree on the necessary foundation premises.

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#138

Post by logfromblammo » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 5:48 PM UTC

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #129

logfromblammo wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hachiko. Greyfriars Bobby. Argos. Silverton's Bobbie. Some dogs are famous (worldwide!) for acts of extraordinary loyalty toward their humans.

Without conversation how can you tell it's loyalty. An animal trained from birth to stay by their master in order not to be chastised and in order to be fed; is it loyalty or conditioning. You can condition a human to "stand in line" but whilst their actions may appear loyal we can often find that assumption to be false. Loyalty of animals seems to be something for which we have no good evidence?

We have a handful of animal behavior studies. These have suggested that your dog actually cares about you, and your cat does not. They also suggest that dogs and wolves do have significant differences in their behavior, attributable to selective breeding.

These studies used the same techniques that researchers use with pre-communicative human babies. They measure gaze direction and duration, among other things. Even with conversation, how could you tell? Humans are able to prevaricate and dissemble, after all.

How can you tell if someone is loyal to your crime family? Maybe he's just conditioned to not wear concrete overshoes and get a cut of the rackets?

How can you tell if someone is loyal to your country? Maybe they are just conditioned to not get fired and blacklisted or imprisoned, and to receive government benefits?

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#139

Post by asciimo » Sat, Mar 12, 2016, 9:33 PM UTC

scoofy wrote: post #86

noondip wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you feel if the moment you were born someone else had already planned the day of your execution?

This is such a sophomoric approach to ethics it hardly deserves a response. Animals are not humans. They are hardly likely to have the same capacity to suffer. Anthropomorphizing them is not a credible way to talk about the issue. At best they ought to be compared to a severely mentally disabled human. Still deserving of dignity, but hardly treated as equal.

> At best they ought to be compared to a severely mentally disabled human. Still deserving of dignity, but hardly treated as equal.

Is it OK to eat severely mentally disabled humans, if we do so "humanely?"

Re: Why killer whales should not be kept in captivity

#140

Post by StephenConnell » Sun, Mar 13, 2016, 12:48 AM UTC

danrisso3 wrote: post #83

diogenescynic wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Demetri Martin: It seems like there's a fine line between having a pet and having a hostage from a different species. You go to somebody's house, they're like, "Close the door. He'll get out. CLOSE THE DOOR! HE'LL GET OUT!" Okay. What kind of relationship do you have with this dog, exactly?

It seems like there's a fine line between having a toddler and having a hostage from the same species. You go to somebody's house, they're like, "Close the door. He'll get out. CLOSE THE DOOR! HE'LL GET OUT!" Okay. What kind of relationship do you have with this kid, exactly?

Ha. Same problem? Communication issues?