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

Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

ucdavis.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 193 posts

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#141

Post by djsbs »

shituonui wrote: post #135
djsbs wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s obvious is economic misunderstanding. The resources “misallocated” in luxury goods motivate and teach us to make better mass goods. The car industry is a great example. luxury vehicles have driven R&D that have made cars safer and cleaner (disc breaks, fuel injection). Tesla has put electric cars just within reach for all by charging rich people for what were (are?) bad cars with lots of status signing Jewelry…

Oh yes, the expertise of Patek Philippe will trickle down any day now.

OP spoke in generalities, and I answered in generalities with specific examples merely as illustrative aids.

You just used sarcasm.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#142

Post by shituonui »

1123581321 wrote: post #140
shituonui wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yes, the expertise of Patek Philippe will trickle down any day now.

It has. Wristwatch mechanical and material expertise has greatly diffused, resulting in good watches at many price points.

I'm sure that's a real benefit to all the people living paycheck-to-paycheck who wear mechanical watches.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#143

Post by 1123581321 »

shituonui wrote: post #142
1123581321 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has. Wristwatch mechanical and material expertise has greatly diffused, resulting in good watches at many price points.

I'm sure that's a real benefit to all the people living paycheck-to-paycheck who wear mechanical watches.

For the ones who want a cheap watch that works well and looks good, absolutely.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#144

Post by harpersealtako »

pessimizer wrote: post #94
h2odragon wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eugenics gave us much better cows, pigs and chickens. We've continued that to freakish levels in some instances. You morals are your own; mine are just fine with short lived chickens and $2/lb chicken breast. The angus and longhorn enthusiasts better police some of their nuts or they're gonna get the Aurochs back.

The purpose of dog breeding isn't health or usefulness, it's to match a picture and description.

Generalizations like this are kind of ridiculous, given the existence of hunting dogs, police dogs, herding dogs, livestock guardian dogs, and even many ordinary family/companionship dogs that are specifically bred to be docile, long-living pets.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#145

Post by djsbs »

shituonui wrote: post #133
djsbs wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a judgement call from someone who doesn't understand any of the three topics and therefore sees only the negatives. As an example, dog breeding which I know least of the three topics, provided society (the object in your sentence) with very specific work dogs that have served society for centuries. Imagine the Inuit without their sled dogs. Jewelry and luxury cars are easier to justify, but Im so bewi…

>Im so bewildered I’ll just ask “what problem you can possibly have with luxury cars and jewelry?” I don't believe you. It is pretty obvious someone would object to luxury cars and jewelry: 1. Luxury cars are often wasteful or dangerous to be around. 2. The resources for jewelry are scarce and often extracted with slave labor. 3. Both are often used as displays of wealth, intended to demean people who can't afford th…

1.“I don't believe you. It is pretty obvious someone would object to luxury cars and jewelry:”

Let me revise, since I have met ppl like OP:

Im so bewildered at this attitude that I’ll just ask “what problem do people like you possibly have with luxury cars and jewelry?”

2. Jewlery can be made with slave labor. There is nothing inherent in jewelry that it must be made with slave labor. Thus, you can object to a available jewelry or specific jewelry but your objection isn't valid for jewelry generally.

This is like objecting to running shoes. De facto they’re made in sweatshops, and available sneakers supports slavery. But nothing inherent in trainers requires slaves.

3. As to the scarcity of resources for jewelry, so what? Thats a moral judgement on your behalf that jewelry is inherently less worthy than, say, an Orthodox icon, or bullion as a hedge against inflation.

4. As to cars, most of your objection appear to be directed at their drivers. How is a VW golf more dangerous than an A3? Only if you assume nastier drivers drive luxury cars. Let me assure you I drive like an utter asshole on my $3000 assessed value car (mea culpa. But I live in the mountains, the car is stick…) Nor does the A3 consume more resources than the Golf to make.

5. As your third objection, I dont agree with your statement: “[…]often used as displays of wealth, intended to demean people who can't afford them”. Clearly some ppl buy expensive things to show off, but I dont think it follows that their intention is to demean. I think that says more about the feelings of inadequacy that we feel next to a fancy car. Feelings we rationalize by telling ourselves they’re doing it on purpose to spite us. They probably aren't giving you a second’s thought.

I think your use of the word “often” is telling. Myself, I’d love to have a luxury car but one criteria would have to be that it is not obvious that it is a luxury car. It follows that luxury cars are not purchased solely to show off (and therefore immoral?)

6. Look, if the OP had objected to cars I wouldn't have bothered to object. Maybe I’d disagree (on the fence on cars), but I can see that an argument can be made that cars, electric or otherwise, are inherently immoral.

The statement was just self-righteous

EDIT: typos. Writing this on my 5 year old SE

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#146

Post by gwern »

tharne wrote: post #8

I think this is one of those studies where you didn't really need to do a study.

No, this is important. There are a lot of people who will tell you that 'selective breeding doesn't work and always backfires, because look how unhealthy some dog breeds are'.

This study is part of the evidence-base showing that that is wrong: those dog breeds are unhealthy because they are incredibly inbred with effective population sizes so small you may be able to count them on two hands.

The bulldogs will always be unhealthy to some degree because those faces are just not a good idea, but even there some bulldog breeds are far sicklier than others, and it's due to the inbreeding, and when you know that, you know how to improve them. This is important for stuff like agricultural breeding: the problems aren't inevitable, and are caused by specific mistakes, like starting with too few individuals, closing the studbook prematurely, and not outcrossing.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#147

Post by djsbs »

shituonui wrote: post #142
1123581321 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has. Wristwatch mechanical and material expertise has greatly diffused, resulting in good watches at many price points.

I'm sure that's a real benefit to all the people living paycheck-to-paycheck who wear mechanical watches.

Again, sarcasm.

Patek Phillipe is 180 years old. “Normal” people used to need mechanical watches to get to work on time until 40 years ago.

Anyway, luxury goods don't have to justify themselves (at all) solely on their technological transfer. They are, PP in particular as opposed to mass produced Rolexes, works of human excellence.

There is nothing immoral in a watch that took a year of human hours to build that isn't immoral about Japanese artisanal charcoal.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#148

Post by shituonui »

djsbs wrote: post #141
shituonui wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yes, the expertise of Patek Philippe will trickle down any day now.

OP spoke in generalities, and I answered in generalities with specific examples merely as illustrative aids. You just used sarcasm.

Sarcasm is a perfectly valid rhetorical device. If you find it rude, I apologize.

Some luxury goods are beautiful. Some are high-performance. However, many of them are prized merely because they are exclusive.

I find very expensive jewelry, almost without exception, to be gaudy and hideous. Even if it were tasteful, it could be made with artificial or semiprecious gems and clad base metals with no change in appearance.

There is nothing from high-end jewelry that can trickle down to the mass market. The entire industry is, by design, based around the work of skilled artisans. If it were possible to mass-produce jewelry, it would no longer be exclusive and would thus be less desirable.

Luxury cars are an interesting example. They are usually prized for their technical excellence. Some of the innovations may actually make it to market. The same definitely does not apply to fashion or to the majority of other luxury goods.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#149

Post by vgeek »

etempleton wrote: post #86
retrac wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's my experience that a dog's tendency to wander or want to escape has only a little to do with its intelligence. (Their ability to effect an escape is a different matter.) I think it's partly just a personality trait. I've met stupid, misanthropic chihuahuas that won't wander and intelligent, deeply loyal huskies that chase after everything they can see.

We tend to measure a dog's intelligence by obedience and trainability, but dogs like huskies and beagles do not follow that rule. There is a reason there are always beagles readily available for adoption. My beagle growing up extremely smart--he knew every trick you can think of; he could remember specific objects by name; track someone's scent in an instant if you said find XXX; and seemed at times to understand who…

I have a corgi/beagle mix, so she loves to smell and doesn't have to crane her neck as much as a standard beagle. She loves to smell everything, so areas where other dogs have been are slow to traverse. She is smart and seems to understand commands, it is just a coin flip of if she will listen (or just give me a quick mopey look)-- especially if there is an interesting smell they're locked on to.

Re: Study: Most Dog Breeds Highly Inbred

#150

Post by shituonui »

djsbs wrote: post #147
shituonui wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure that's a real benefit to all the people living paycheck-to-paycheck who wear mechanical watches.

Again, sarcasm. Patek Phillipe is 180 years old. “Normal” people used to need mechanical watches to get to work on time until 40 years ago. Anyway, luxury goods don't have to justify themselves (at all) solely on their technological transfer. They are, PP in particular as opposed to mass produced Rolexes, works of human excellence. There is nothing immoral in a watch that took a year of human hours to build that isn'…

>They are, PP in particular as opposed to mass produced Rolexes, works of human excellence.

You are getting increasingly metaphysical.

These watches are built on antiquated technology and, by design, cannot be mass-produced, so clearly they will never lead to technological innovation.

These watches are so rare that they can provide very little beauty. The vast majority of people will never lay eyes on one.

Let me ask you a question: would you support the government purchasing Patek Philippe watches and putting them in libraries for the common people to check out? This would lead to much more beauty than letting them sit in rich people's collections and would encourage even more "human excellence". But I suspect you'd find it a waste of tax money.

Post reply on HN