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

The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 155 posts

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#81

Post by Joakal »

austincheney wrote: post #73
jaggednad wrote: post #37

One theory why primates evolved big brains is because they had hands. Big brains for an animal like a gazelle don’t pay off because, without hands, there isn’t much a gazelle can do with that big brain. Better it use that energy for bigger leg muscles. Primates evolves hands so they could better grasp branches, but, once they had hands, there was a lot more they could do with them, like make tools. A bigger brain for…

It should be noted though that intelligence isn't linked to brain size, except for in the case of hominids compared to other hominids. There is also not a direct correlation to increased intelligence and survivability except for competition between individuals. Corvids are among the most intelligent animals in the world. In many cases far more intelligent than many ape species. Their brains are the size of almonds, a…

Nitpick, article quotes scientists that talks about brain size relative to body being a factor in intelligence, not brain size alone.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#82

Post by rococode »

hanniabu wrote: post #78
jaggednad wrote: post #37

One theory why primates evolved big brains is because they had hands. Big brains for an animal like a gazelle don’t pay off because, without hands, there isn’t much a gazelle can do with that big brain. Better it use that energy for bigger leg muscles. Primates evolves hands so they could better grasp branches, but, once they had hands, there was a lot more they could do with them, like make tools. A bigger brain for…

So why aren't all birds as smart as crows? They have similar anatomy.

What I've read is that crows are smart for the same reason that dolphins are smart ("social intelligence"). Crows also tend to live in flocks/groups, unlike many other bird species.

Not a great source, but here's an excerpt explaining that they tend to grow up in groups:

But growing up is a different story. During younger years, they often live in larger flocks dubbed juvenile gangs. "It's exactly how it sounds: they're basically a bunch of teenagers trying to compete with each other," Brown says. And it's these relationships they have to keep tabs on.

https://cosmosmagazine.com/social-sciences/why-are-crows-so-...

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#83

Post by otabdeveloper2 »

rland wrote: post #22

Octopuses are really incredible creatures. They diverged from humans in the evolutionary tree hundreds of millions of years ago. Our common ancestor would have been a very dumb animal. Their brain structure is so different: 8 semi-autonomous tentacles, with one sort of central coordinating body. What could it possibly be like to experience the world that way? They're probably the "peak" of intelligence with the most…

> 8 semi-autonomous tentacles, with one sort of central coordinating body. What could it possibly be like to experience the world that way?

Humans have two semi-autonomous brain hemispheres, each with a slightly different personality.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#84

Post by mirimir »

thomasfedb wrote: post #72
chrisweekly wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"primates did not evolve hands so they could better grasp branches, but rather they better grasp branches because they evolved hands and so had a higher rate of survival." We agree that it can be difficult to distinguish causation from correlation, and in this case you may be right that the survival advantage conferred by better grasp of branches might have been a "bonus" or helpful side-effect, rather than an adapti…

I think the distinction being made is between evolution and design. In evolution traits do not come about for a reason, they occur at random, but they persist if they are advantageous.

Yes. But there's an illusion of intentionality. Because [pausing, looking at my hands] it's all just so bloody amazing.

But on the other hand, some of the kludginess is also bloody amazing. Spiders, for example. The gut passes through the "brain". So there's a tradeoff between "brain" size and eating. And so they employ external digestion, and suck liquid.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#85

Post by diminoten »

jaggednad wrote: post #37

One theory why primates evolved big brains is because they had hands. Big brains for an animal like a gazelle don’t pay off because, without hands, there isn’t much a gazelle can do with that big brain. Better it use that energy for bigger leg muscles. Primates evolves hands so they could better grasp branches, but, once they had hands, there was a lot more they could do with them, like make tools. A bigger brain for…

I sometimes feel like we talk about evolution wrong. Here, for example; it's not like gazelles couldn't take advantage of being smarter, there are plenty of advantages to be had if you can outsmart your predator, it's just that the smarter gazelles weren't ever smart enough for that to matter.

It's more about if it's possible for minute intelligence improvements to produce higher survival chances. For a gazelle, the intellect leap needed to be substantial, and random genetic mutations weren't going to get there. For an octopus, each little intellect bump meant little survival bumps too.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#86

Post by otabdeveloper2 »

mirimir wrote: post #70
mensetmanusman wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you got down voted. The ‘why’ does prejudice a creator :) It also assumes free will in asking the quesiton.

I wasn't thinking about the question of a creator, per se . I was thinking generally about the fallacy of seeking intentionality in evolution. There is a point to analyzing what happened, of course. It's just that too much "why" is dangerous.

> It's just that too much "why" is dangerous.

You're totally right. Asking questions and thinking about things might lead you to dangerous places. You might even (gasp) eventually start believing in God. That would be doubleplus ungood crimethink!

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#87

Post by Yetanfou »

stewbrew wrote: post #68
nine_k wrote: post #44

This is what a failed alien invasion / colonization attempt might look like. A succesful splashdown, reasonable adaptation to the local conditions — and a fatal flaw speeds up development enormously, bodies replicate and die long before their brains mature. The culture is lost, the invaders turned into animals doing primitive hunting.

Maybe they came from a gas planet and they came to invade the deep sea because that's what home looks like. Unfortunately, these super intelligent beings failed to understand that, on Earth, most of the fun happens on land.

Does it? For us, certainly, but put all land-life on a scales and all sea-life on the other side and it'd most certainly tip to the sea-side.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#88

Post by stewbrew »

Yetanfou wrote: post #87
stewbrew wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they came from a gas planet and they came to invade the deep sea because that's what home looks like. Unfortunately, these super intelligent beings failed to understand that, on Earth, most of the fun happens on land.

Does it? For us, certainly, but put all land-life on a scales and all sea-life on the other side and it'd most certainly tip to the sea-side.

You're probably right if you look at the mere amount of bio mass. I'd wager you're wrong if you look at the complexity & general level of activity of life forms. Unless you find a way to efficiently get the oxygen out of the water and to deal with water pressure, I think most life forms are better off on land.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#89

Post by TeMPOraL »

sherr wrote: post #80
mirimir wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't mean to imply that. Indeed, Portia! So if you love Portia, I recommend Peter Watts' Echopraxia and (for a full-length focus) Adrian Tchaikovsky's Children of Time .

For spider intelligence and an absoutely brilliant science-fiction novel, try Adrian Tchaikovsky's "Children of Time" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/25499718-children-of-tim... This book really made me realise (once again) how strange and wonderful good science-fiction can be.

Thirding the recommendation. I heard about this book on HN too, btw.

It's absolutely amazing, I love how the author constructed a civilization of sentient, tool-using beings that's qualitatively different than humans. It's one of the most original books I've ever read, and it rekindled my interest in insects.

Re: The Octopus Is Smart as Heck, But Why?

#90

Post by ramblerman »

chrisweekly wrote: post #59
warent wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're saying "Big brains" I assume you mean a higher level of cognition and awareness in some general sense, not a physically larger brain. First I think you're getting the cause/effect of evolution backwards. For example, primates did not evolve hands so they could better grasp branches, but rather they better grasp branches because they evolved hands and so had a higher rate of survival. So the question isn't…

"primates did not evolve hands so they could better grasp branches, but rather they better grasp branches because they evolved hands and so had a higher rate of survival." We agree that it can be difficult to distinguish causation from correlation, and in this case you may be right that the survival advantage conferred by better grasp of branches might have been a "bonus" or helpful side-effect, rather than an adapti…

This kind of nitpick seems a bit unnecessary, and I think it's particularly strong because people are contending with intelligent design nonsense.

When you talk generation to generation, the gradual tiny mutation each time did indeed allow primates to grab the branches a little better and so they had a higher rate of survival and the causation matters.

But when you talk about the end product (the hand), it is fair to say that primates (as the product of those millions of tiny iterations) evolved to better grab branches, imo.

Post reply on HN