“My Octopus Teacher” defied convention • Hacker News Board

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#21

Post by merpnderp » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:06 PM UTC

moritzwarhier wrote: post #11

Avalaxy wrote: post #8

> The only thing to add to that, where you have to be slightly careful, is if an animal hasn’t got strong genes. And then you interfere and you allow that animal to procreate. You could potentially be making the gene pool weaker and more susceptible to mange. That’s where you have to be a bit careful. It's interesting that we can talk about this in such an objective and rational way when it involves non-human animal…

I share your sentiment in the regard that it highlights an obvious difference between how we think about humans and animals. I think you probably know why applying darwinisim to human society is "extremely controversial". On a side note, what constitutes "good genes" nowadays? The ability to exploit finite natural resources (including human health and lives) in a maximally efficient way? Accumulating as much money as…

What exactly do you believe the link is between someone's profession and their genes? Because your comment reads like you believe there are genes for things you consider moral and immoral.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#22

Post by BEEdwards » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:16 PM UTC

I did not like this documentary at all, i don't get the point of it at all...

A privileged white dude complains about how he feels disconnected from his family, so he spends a year harassing an octopus.

It literally tries to run away and he stalks it, it's creepy.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#23

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:19 PM UTC

BEEdwards wrote: post #22

I did not like this documentary at all, i don't get the point of it at all... A privileged white dude complains about how he feels disconnected from his family, so he spends a year harassing an octopus. It literally tries to run away and he stalks it, it's creepy.

[deleted]

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#24

Post by resters » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:33 PM UTC

1MachineElf wrote: post #9

deleted

I almost stopped watching it during the first few minutes for the same reason, you just have to get past that first bit and get to the first underwater shots.

It's an incredible film, definitely my favorite nature film.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#25

Post by moritzwarhier » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

merpnderp wrote: post #21

moritzwarhier wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I share your sentiment in the regard that it highlights an obvious difference between how we think about humans and animals. I think you probably know why applying darwinisim to human society is "extremely controversial". On a side note, what constitutes "good genes" nowadays? The ability to exploit finite natural resources (including human health and lives) in a maximally efficient way? Accumulating as much money as…

What exactly do you believe the link is between someone's profession and their genes? Because your comment reads like you believe there are genes for things you consider moral and immoral.

I was aiming at the fact that money is today a prime signifier of "evolutionary fitness", if that makes any sense.

In my tangent about natural resources and fossil fuel I wanted to suggest that making money (especially big money) is strongly correlated with consumption of natural resources. (see tragedy of the commons)

Mostly indirectly, even in professions that to not directly "burn fuel".

Sell more goods, buy more property, consume energy. Which of course is also a necessary part of modern life.

The problem is scale. We are not getting more efficient in depleting natural resources (as in using less for more), we are maximizing monetary gain.

That being said, I have no problem if you discard my answer as incoherent rambling.

On the other hand, I don't understand why I was implying "immoral genes" or anything like that.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#26

Post by defterGoose » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:35 PM UTC

BEEdwards wrote: post #22

I did not like this documentary at all, i don't get the point of it at all... A privileged white dude complains about how he feels disconnected from his family, so he spends a year harassing an octopus. It literally tries to run away and he stalks it, it's creepy.

The world must look a very gray place to you.

Is our curiosity about the world not one of the fundamental features of humanity?

The fact that a man is able to rediscover his fervor for life in something as lowly as an octopus seems to me to be nothing short of beautiful.

The film is antithetical to our fractured modern society of ease, reason, disregard for our lowlier neighbors on this planet, and mindless consumption.

Its frustrating to me that its expectedly relegated to the doc category while a vapid, shallow commentary on modern life such as Nomadland is nominated for best picture.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#27

Post by js2 » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

I enjoyed reading this interview a lot. I appreciate the perspective and knowledge that Craig Foster offers into the ecosystem he is so familiar with.

But with the documentary, it was the opposite. The cinematography is gorgeous and many of the scenes that were captured were truly remarkable because he spent so much time in the water. The footage of the octopus and the sharks was just extraordinary. However, I really found the way Craig injected his own life story into documentary to be a real distraction and wished it had been more like a Sir David Attenborough documentary. (Actually, some of the footage made it into Blue Planet II, episode 5.)

If he had conducted the documentary more like this interview, I'm sure I would've enjoyed it even more.

> Octopuses don’t have tentacles as such.

Huh, TIL.

> The frustrating thing about a film is that you’ve only got 85 minutes. What you don’t see is that I have watched those pyjama sharks for years. [...] But what you don’t see is that I’m close to many different animals. All the different types of fish I got to know extremely well, otters, even some of the mollusks. Whales. There’re so many different animals. There’s no time to show all of that.

I wonder how much unedited footage he has? Seems like he could make an entire season about it all, especially now that he has a relationship with Netflix.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#28

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:41 PM UTC

scotty79 wrote: post #4

What's weird is that octopuses are not a social species. So it's a bit of a mystery how they evolved so high intelligence without having to outsmart other individuals of their own species constantly. It's theorethized that they have very rich environments and have to work very hard to hunt and to stay alive as they have no armor. But the puzzle still remains why their intelligence is similar at all to the one that ev…

“evolution had gifted them with a profoundly complex toolkit for taking the world apart to see if there was a crab hiding under it.”

― Adrian Tchaikovsky, Children of Ruin

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#29

Post by WhompingWindows » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:47 PM UTC

Avalaxy wrote: post #8

> The only thing to add to that, where you have to be slightly careful, is if an animal hasn’t got strong genes. And then you interfere and you allow that animal to procreate. You could potentially be making the gene pool weaker and more susceptible to mange. That’s where you have to be a bit careful. It's interesting that we can talk about this in such an objective and rational way when it involves non-human animal…

Humans are supposedly born with inalienable rights - life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. Our societies in the West are built upon this shared foundation of rights. To deprive any adults of the ability to procreate would be considered barbaric, as they want to pursue the creation of "life" with their liberty, and to support their own happiness.

Meanwhile, nature is just raw competition, we're used to talking about genetic evolution in natural populations. Natural creatures aren't deemed to have any right to their own life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness, or at least not by most humans outside environmentalists.

Re: “My Octopus Teacher” defied convention

#30

Post by koboll » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 2:51 PM UTC

Avalaxy wrote: post #8

> The only thing to add to that, where you have to be slightly careful, is if an animal hasn’t got strong genes. And then you interfere and you allow that animal to procreate. You could potentially be making the gene pool weaker and more susceptible to mange. That’s where you have to be a bit careful. It's interesting that we can talk about this in such an objective and rational way when it involves non-human animal…

Humans have technology like medical care and a lack of natural predators that substantially mitigates any impact gene pool deficiencies might cause, whereas wild animals do not. So there's no real danger that the human population will collapse without eugenics. That isn't true of the wild. This changes the ethical calculus quite a bit.