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

In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 38 posts

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#11

Post by hellofunk »

jansan wrote: post #10
chrischen wrote: post #7

While human social loners fit the mould, I don't think that's the lone point we should get out of this. What is actually beneficial to society (whether mold or human) is diversity in genetics, neuro-diversity, and in general.

I wonder what happened with the other, dead reply to your comment. Looking at the other comments from that user there seems to be something wrong with YC News or someone with lots of karma was triggered and went on a rampage.

Well, phrases like this are just empty, negative hyperbole:

> Creative people make for lousy project planners and directors.

That warranted the downvotes I think.

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#12

Post by op03 »

analognoise wrote: post #9
chrischen wrote: post #7

While human social loners fit the mould, I don't think that's the lone point we should get out of this. What is actually beneficial to society (whether mold or human) is diversity in genetics, neuro-diversity, and in general.

When you say "neuro-diversity" is beneficial, what exactly do you mean?

Take curiosity. If everyone in the village is highly curious and off exploring the jungle with tigers, everyone in the village, sooner or later, dies.

On the other hand if everyone in the village sees tigers behind every bush and stays put within the safe confines of village walls, no one in the village learns how to tame or hunt the tiger.

A Tiger here being a placeholder for any threat/unknown the group faces, requiring talents as yet not known to the group.

If you do find a village that has managed to Not fall victim to both those scenarios think about what it tells you about the distribution of curious/non-curious within the village.

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#13

Post by teraku »

op03 wrote: post #12
analognoise wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "neuro-diversity" is beneficial, what exactly do you mean?

Take curiosity. If everyone in the village is highly curious and off exploring the jungle with tigers, everyone in the village, sooner or later, dies. On the other hand if everyone in the village sees tigers behind every bush and stays put within the safe confines of village walls, no one in the village learns how to tame or hunt the tiger. A Tiger here being a placeholder for any threat/unknown the group faces, requ…

This. I remember there being articles about Neandertals having almost no curious explorers, being very catious, whereas homo sapiens skeletons found in swamps, with deadly mushrooms in their stomach and whatnot. So even though Neandertals had a more advanced brain during their time compared to the homo sapien competitor, they died because they did not make it, maybe because they did not take enough risk.

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#14

Post by tasogare »

op03 wrote: post #12
analognoise wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "neuro-diversity" is beneficial, what exactly do you mean?

Take curiosity. If everyone in the village is highly curious and off exploring the jungle with tigers, everyone in the village, sooner or later, dies. On the other hand if everyone in the village sees tigers behind every bush and stays put within the safe confines of village walls, no one in the village learns how to tame or hunt the tiger. A Tiger here being a placeholder for any threat/unknown the group faces, requ…

Neuro-diversity usually means autism. It's unclear how people on the low end of the spectrum (those who can't speak nor live by themselves) contribute in any way to society. [Note: I didn't say that society shouldn't help them even if their contribution is zilch, in fact this is the proper of a developed society to take care of its member in need]

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#15

Post by 0134340 »

koeng wrote: post #3

This activity can sometimes be annoying in biology experiments, especially when you get down to the bacterial size and do measurements on the population. Think the average expression of gene X is 100? Well, it is, with 90% of the population expressing the gene at 111 and 10% not expressing it at all. Unlike computers, cells like to do their own thing :(

>Unlike computers, cells like to do their own thing

As an ex-repair tech, I can't applaud this comment.

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#16

Post by 0134340 »

teraku wrote: post #13
op03 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take curiosity. If everyone in the village is highly curious and off exploring the jungle with tigers, everyone in the village, sooner or later, dies. On the other hand if everyone in the village sees tigers behind every bush and stays put within the safe confines of village walls, no one in the village learns how to tame or hunt the tiger. A Tiger here being a placeholder for any threat/unknown the group faces, requ…

This. I remember there being articles about Neandertals having almost no curious explorers, being very catious, whereas homo sapiens skeletons found in swamps, with deadly mushrooms in their stomach and whatnot. So even though Neandertals had a more advanced brain during their time compared to the homo sapien competitor, they died because they did not make it, maybe because they did not take enough risk.

>So even though Neandertals had a more advanced brain

I'm aware that it's accepted Neandertals might've been as capable in many areas of survival, however I'm not aware that it's been accepted they had more advanced brains. Got a source?

I remember hearing somewhere, one source I remember [1], that despite their intelligence, they tended to rove in smaller tribes partly perhaps due to less inter-communication skills, which may've led to a disadvantage in warfare.

Or perhaps, my own thoughts, the 'loner genes', for lack of a better term, iterated more throughout the Neaderthal ancestry which led to smaller tribes. Another guess, maybe forested Eurasia, which may act as natural barriers compared to more open African plains caused a selection for smaller groups or gave way to human genetics that naturally selected for smaller groups. Of course, take it all with a grain of salt.

1. https://www.history.com/news/neanderthals-likely-lived-in-sm...

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#17

Post by op03 »

tasogare wrote: post #14
op03 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take curiosity. If everyone in the village is highly curious and off exploring the jungle with tigers, everyone in the village, sooner or later, dies. On the other hand if everyone in the village sees tigers behind every bush and stays put within the safe confines of village walls, no one in the village learns how to tame or hunt the tiger. A Tiger here being a placeholder for any threat/unknown the group faces, requ…

Neuro-diversity usually means autism. It's unclear how people on the low end of the spectrum (those who can't speak nor live by themselves) contribute in any way to society. [Note: I didn't say that society shouldn't help them even if their contribution is zilch, in fact this is the proper of a developed society to take care of its member in need]

Look at Satya Nadella and his spl needs kid. Good example of how dealing with someone with diff needs shapes ones experiences and thinking and actions. He constantly talks about empathy in ways you won't find others doing.

Ofcourse what you learn from dealing with people with different needs depends on your own personality, needs, circumstances etc.

What is interesting to me at work, is lot of people struggle to deal with each other because of differences in needs, personalities, skillgaps, knowledgegaps. And as the world gets more complex, as info explodes, these gaps and differences increase.

Those people who think about and try to deal with differences in needs (like those who deal with autistic kids), will learn things that those who filter out people in the group they can't deal with wont.

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#18

Post by Baeocystin »

0134340 wrote: post #16
teraku wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. I remember there being articles about Neandertals having almost no curious explorers, being very catious, whereas homo sapiens skeletons found in swamps, with deadly mushrooms in their stomach and whatnot. So even though Neandertals had a more advanced brain during their time compared to the homo sapien competitor, they died because they did not make it, maybe because they did not take enough risk.

>So even though Neandertals had a more advanced brain I'm aware that it's accepted Neandertals might've been as capable in many areas of survival, however I'm not aware that it's been accepted they had more advanced brains. Got a source? I remember hearing somewhere, one source I remember [1], that despite their intelligence, they tended to rove in smaller tribes partly perhaps due to less inter-communication skills,…

We know they had a larger brain volume than us, even when correcting for overall body size. That much is an established fact. What that means, if anything, regarding their behavior & abilities is strictly, and highly, speculative.

(Still lots of fun to think about. If I were to hazard a guess, it would be something along the lines of greater neoteny in h. Sapiens sapiens. For an analogy, compare dogs and wolves. Wolves have larger brains, but dogs have a greater ability to read social cues.)

Re: In slime molds, evolution selects 'loners' who refrain from collective behavior

#19

Post by tasogare »

op03 wrote: post #17
tasogare wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neuro-diversity usually means autism. It's unclear how people on the low end of the spectrum (those who can't speak nor live by themselves) contribute in any way to society. [Note: I didn't say that society shouldn't help them even if their contribution is zilch, in fact this is the proper of a developed society to take care of its member in need]

Look at Satya Nadella and his spl needs kid. Good example of how dealing with someone with diff needs shapes ones experiences and thinking and actions. He constantly talks about empathy in ways you won't find others doing. Ofcourse what you learn from dealing with people with different needs depends on your own personality, needs, circumstances etc. What is interesting to me at work, is lot of people struggle to deal…

For people that flagged my message: "The word neurodiversity is attributed to Judy Singer, an Australian social scientist on the autism spectrum, who used the term in her sociology honors thesis published in 1999." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurodiversity). You can bury your head in the sand, that doesn't change the meaning of words.

Also, it's is quite ironical that people advocating for it can't handle an opinion deviating slightly from their own beliefs.

Post reply on HN