Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

bioone.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 269 posts

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#101

Post by robotresearcher »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #97
robotresearcher wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How on earth do you know that? And what difference does 'knowing' make? Do they make the sacrifice or not? They clearly do.

By reading, being educated. Its far to late to be mystified about how animals work. Its a couple of centuries of study by now, about their instincts and behaviors. And recall, 'understanding the concept of sacrifice' was the topic.

So you know how animals work! Excellent. Please build me a machine that does the same, to demonstrate your understanding.

It can be slow and inefficient to make up for lack of equivalent materials and mechanisms. A simulated one will do.

Or just explain how it works. I've been looking forward to reading that book. You'd sell some copies.

Also, a nitpick: it's a few millennia of studies by now. For example you can read Aristotle on the topic from 1700+ years ago.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#102

Post by blueprint »

jdmichal wrote: post #72
DeusExMachina wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are the only mammal with consciousness, which leads to knowledge of the future and the discerning of good and evil. Despite the fact that we still don’t understand the least about how consciousness arises in our brain, we are nonetheless the only animal that shows this. Even in cases like monkeys recognizing themselves una mirror, no animal seem to go past that and be aware of the future like we do.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15048517 ... "Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals,…

You're falling for the assumption the brain's role is generating consciousness. It could also not do so yet still be part of an organism which is conscious. I can say that confidently because I understand how consciousness is generated. I could easily say it here and have in the past. Sure, I'll be downvoted by idiots who do not know whether I do or do not know how consciousness works, but are instead acting on their instincts and emotions. But perhaps there's at least one person in the world who is truthful enough not to have to downvote and to instead ask themselves the question of what it would take for what I assert to be true.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#103

Post by krapp »

meri_dian wrote: post #69
taneq wrote: post #7

So we're not the only: - tool-using animal - fire-using animal - language-using animal - animal which domesticates other animals - animal which builds complex structures Aha! I know! We're the only animal which continually comes up with reasons why we're special.

In each of those categories we're far and away the best. I really don't understand this feeling that humans need to be modest or that describing ourselves as special is wrong. We are special. I think among some people that are frustrated with the human world for whatever - either personal or abstract - reason, there's a feeling of misanthropy that colors their thinking, and so they try to belittle humanity.

>I really don't understand this feeling that humans need to be modest or that describing ourselves as special is wrong. We are special.

To simply state that humans are best adapted at certain traits is true, but humans have tended to think of themselves as "special" in that "we're not even animals, but beings made in the image of God and given divine right to conquer Nature and do with it what we will." That anthropocentric bias has led to a multitude of evils and scientific falsehoods, and that's what needs to be corrected. It's got nothing to do with misanthropy.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#104

Post by pluma »

Y-bar wrote: post #73
pluma wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful there with the phrasing. When we talk about animals communicating we generally mean animals using signals (e.g. to indicate the presence of a predator or a source of food). I'm not aware of any reliably documented case of animals communicating abstract concepts. There is some research with great apes that makes the rounds every now and then but the findings are dubious at best as there's a lot of conflict of…

The question was "language", not "abstract concepts". I am not aware of any modern definition of language that requires abstract concepts. Signals of many kinds are however certainly integral to language. Why are Jose discounted in your point of view?

Because when people say "language" they usually imply certain capabilities we have not yet observed in other animals, especially when talking about what humans have that other animals don't.

It's similar to being able to use tools (which we've seen in many species) versus being able to create tools (which we've seen e.g. in certain corvids). The former is a significant first step but the later is what proves a certain amount of abstract thinking beyond the immediate here and now that goes far beyond mere instinct.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#105

Post by dekrg »

blocked_again wrote: post #53
taneq wrote: post #7

So we're not the only: - tool-using animal - fire-using animal - language-using animal - animal which domesticates other animals - animal which builds complex structures Aha! I know! We're the only animal which continually comes up with reasons why we're special.

You can never convince an animal to give it's food in promise of a place in heaven or to die for it's country. That's something only humans are capable of. Beat that!

>die for it's country

Sure you can argue semantic about how animals don't have countries, but it's a fact that animals do fight and kill each other to protect their territory.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#106

Post by pluma »

jaredandrews wrote: post #45
pluma wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful there with the phrasing. When we talk about animals communicating we generally mean animals using signals (e.g. to indicate the presence of a predator or a source of food). I'm not aware of any reliably documented case of animals communicating abstract concepts. There is some research with great apes that makes the rounds every now and then but the findings are dubious at best as there's a lot of conflict of…

> I'm not aware of any reliably documented case of animals communicating abstract concepts. I guess this is difficult to prove. I'm not sure if it matches with the definition of "abstract concepts" but I was reading earlier today that Bottlenose Dolphins "transmit cultural knowledge across generations".[0] So maybe yes? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottlenose_dolphin#Tool_use_an...

As far as I can tell from that section this is more about show-and-tell. There's a difference between demonstrating something to teach it (mimicry) and using language to teach it (explanation).

If I tell you that you can put a stick in a certain tree and get honey out, that's different from me bringing you to that tree, putting a stick in it and showing you the honey (while being swarmed by angry bees but I digress).

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#107

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

fapjacks wrote: post #27
taneq wrote: post #7

So we're not the only: - tool-using animal - fire-using animal - language-using animal - animal which domesticates other animals - animal which builds complex structures Aha! I know! We're the only animal which continually comes up with reasons why we're special.

Call me when you find another animal that launched itself to the moon.

The vast majority of humanity can't accomplish that. I guess we all get credit for the achievements of any of our species? Are we then also burdened with credit for any individual's atrocities?

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#108

Post by hyperpallium »

taneq wrote: post #7

So we're not the only: - tool-using animal - fire-using animal - language-using animal - animal which domesticates other animals - animal which builds complex structures Aha! I know! We're the only animal which continually comes up with reasons why we're special.

You can argue for their intelligence, but they can't argue for yours.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#109

Post by saguro »

Rainymood wrote: post #95
saguro wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think all branches of evolution lead to intelligence given any finite amount of time.

Of course not, but there just has to be one apart from ours, right? Besides we will all be extinct anyway before that because evolution takes billions of years.

That's probably a question that CS researches will get to address one day in the future... Estimating what percentage of reasonable length DNA arrangements leads to intelligent organisms.

Re: Intentional Fire-Spreading by “Firehawk” Raptors in Northern Australia

#110

Post by tjoff »

Rainymood wrote: post #95
saguro wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think all branches of evolution lead to intelligence given any finite amount of time.

Of course not, but there just has to be one apart from ours, right? Besides we will all be extinct anyway before that because evolution takes billions of years.

Has to be one apart from ours? For what? For there to be two special species?
Post reply on HN