First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese • Hacker News Board

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#21

Post by skepicurean » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:27 PM UTC

redsummer wrote: post #4

Any significant contact would wipe the Sentinelese out. Even a common cold infection would be the end of them. The anthropologists know this, but seem willing to risk this for their own ego. If we wanted to learn anything about the Sentinelese, then perhaps we could use well-camouflaged camera traps, and other electronic eavesdropping devices. The moral considerations are difficult - it's a privacy breach, but the in…

The author indicates that the Indian government banned visits to the Sentinelese after their visit had taken place.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#22

Post by jwise0 » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:29 PM UTC

ikeboy wrote: post #19

Is it known how similar they are besides for culture, i.e. would an infant from there raised among humans or an infant from us raised by them be able to learn the culture? Has anything similar been tried with other isolated tribes?

These people are humans.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#23

Post by jerf » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:33 PM UTC

codezero wrote: post #5

redsummer wrote: post #4

Any significant contact would wipe the Sentinelese out. Even a common cold infection would be the end of them. The anthropologists know this, but seem willing to risk this for their own ego. If we wanted to learn anything about the Sentinelese, then perhaps we could use well-camouflaged camera traps, and other electronic eavesdropping devices. The moral considerations are difficult - it's a privacy breach, but the in…

I don't think the moral considerations are that difficult. Would you accept NSA surveillance if they said it was so that your descendants could understand you, and "For Science"?

The question doesn't work because I'm leaving a footprint a mile wide already. Anyone who uses Facebook in a serious way has already said "yes" to your question.

It has often occurred to me that my own children could be reading through my comments years from now. Probably not. There's a lot of them. Of course if they can search, well, who knows.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#24

Post by dang » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:36 PM UTC

fighting wrote: post #12

How about major religions telling us big dude in the sky is always watching? And they always claim the moral highground in everything, if not outright claiming to be the source of all morals.

Religious flamewars are not allowed on HN. Please don't post comments like this.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11714407 and marked it off-topic.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#25

Post by codezero » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:48 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #23

codezero wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the moral considerations are that difficult. Would you accept NSA surveillance if they said it was so that your descendants could understand you, and "For Science"?

The question doesn't work because I'm leaving a footprint a mile wide already. Anyone who uses Facebook in a serious way has already said "yes" to your question. It has often occurred to me that my own children could be reading through my comments years from now. Probably not. There's a lot of them. Of course if they can search, well, who knows.

Good point, however, Facebook doesn't really contain private moments/thoughts, which is what a bunch of hidden cameras would capture. Facebook allows you to write your story and omit details you choose. Also, younger people have flocked to more ephemeral forms of communication (or so I've heard, I don't claim to back that up with numbers).

All the same, I think you make a good point.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#26

Post by codezero » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:50 PM UTC

skepicurean wrote: post #20

codezero wrote: post #2

It appears this is about contact with a different people, the Jarawa, I don't see anything indicating contact with the Sentinelese except the caption to the photo, is there any documented evidence? It appears the author has incorrectly labeled any tribe on the Andaman Islands as "Sentinelese."

It appears you didn't closely read the article because it documents two separate events: 1. The author's meeting with the Sentinelese. 2. The author's meeting with the Jarawa. You are correct that most of the photos are from the meeting with the Jarawa and that much of the article describes the author's time with the Jarawa but there is a segment which explicitly describes the meeting with the Sentinelese, separate f…

I am saying that the author is using Sentinelese interchangeably with Jarawa/Andaman incorrectly.

The only reference I can find for such contact is a blog post and a 1993 news article that appears anecdotal. I'd like to see the journal article written about this contact by the Anthropological Survey of India which funded the contact with the Andaman Islanders, but I can't find a source, leading me to believe it didn't happen as described.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#27

Post by WhoBeI » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:50 PM UTC

ikeboy wrote: post #19

Is it known how similar they are besides for culture, i.e. would an infant from there raised among humans or an infant from us raised by them be able to learn the culture? Has anything similar been tried with other isolated tribes?

Your choice of words offend me.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#28

Post by codezero » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:51 PM UTC

ealexhudson wrote: post #18

codezero wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See my edited comment – they have a photo of contact with a tribal people, there are many tribes on the Andaman Islands, not just the Sentinelese, and there is no documented contact between the Sentinelese and outsiders since 1880, which was just an abduction, not really contact. The photos here appear to show contact with a Jawara tribe, and are incorrectly labeled as Sentinelese.

Only two of the photos are captioned as being Sentinelese, the rest are captioned as being Jawara?

Right, and I am arguing that these are incorrectly labeled because there's no authentic source showing such contact, so something has been lost in translation wherein Andaman Islanders are being called Sentinelese.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#29

Post by ChrisDutrow » Tue, May 17, 2016, 4:55 PM UTC

> The tribes might be primitive in their technological achievements but socially they are far ahead of us”.

Based on my understanding of "reality", I would assume this would tend to be the case. From what I understand, rapid technological advancement tends to wreak havoc on social structures.

These people are wise to attack outsiders, especially given their early contact with westerners in 1880. There are all kinds of ways outside contact is likely to bring despair to their community.

It also sounds like they have a matriarchal society which is (of course debatably) a more stable, more advanced social structure.

Re: First Friendly Contact with the Sentinelese

#30

Post by schoen » Tue, May 17, 2016, 5:02 PM UTC

88e282102ae2e5b wrote: post #16

takee wrote: post #8

If this really was the first successful contact, I don't quite understand how the language of these people is the same as/similar to other Andaman island/Indian languages. Context: "Nariyali Jaba Jaba".

The Sentinelese and the people on Andaman Island must have been once been a single group living in the same place within the last few hundred years. The language would change somewhat after they split up, but it is still mutually intelligible apparently.

It was really interesting to read in James C. Scott's work that many uncontacted tribes are not only not primordially isolated from other human beings, but may be descended from people who deliberately separated from other civilizations because they didn't like them. (Edit: for example, they might have been slaves or conscript soldiers, or people who were defeated in a war.) Some of these people may then have significant, but maybe increasingly vague, awareness of outsiders, and a dislike of them.

Scott suggests that we might tend to think that isolated people have been there for millennia and have no idea that there are other human beings, but that very often they just wanted to be alone, or not part of a particular society. (And for those who deliberately left, they may have left behind things like governments, agriculture, and metalworking technology.)

It does seem like we have a tendency to say "ooh! unchanging primordial antiquity!" and not remember that human migration is one of the greatest constants of human history, and everyone has a story about how they got where they are.