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

Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

news.asu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 274 posts

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#261

Post by EasyMark »

jjk166 wrote: post #243
ysofunny wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe unclear to you. may I recommend Orality and Literacy by Walter J. Ong. which talks about how text and writing transformed human culture the point (which I learned from the book) is how writting transformed human culture but did not define it, humans have a pre-literal (i.e. written) culture whose origin is literally really lost to history I'm saying that tech transfer can absolutely be speech driven, but I admi…

No one is denying that tech transfer can be speech driven, but that doesn't mean that this particular increase in tech transfer was because of speech.

Right, but there are certainly going to be a ceiling to how far one can go. With writing it can be copied nearly verbatim and kept for centuries whereas the human mind is brittle and forgets, fuzzes, and randomly changes knowledge, it can contain only so much data.

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#262

Post by dbf60fcd »

xeromal wrote: post #239
calepayson wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fire is rad but I don’t see how it explains modern civilization. If most animals are operating on a calorie deficit and fixing this can lead to larger brains then why haven’t domesticated animals evolved towards our level of intelligence?

Probably because our interference with their breeding selects for non-smart qualities.

yes

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#263

Post by dbf60fcd »

Amezarak wrote: post #253
acchow wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the 2nd generation of mule, then 3rd? If the probability of viability keeps dropping generation after generation, eventually it will delete itself?

It doesn't work like that. Backcrossing it with one of the parent species (assuming fertility in the first place) as you'd expect tends to increase the likelihood of fertile offspring in proportion to the number of generations. And that's exactly what you'd expect in any hybridization event. And anyway, mules are actually pretty special in that horses and donkeys are actually fairly distant relatives (diverged 4 mill…

[flagged]

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#264

Post by vasco »

mrguyorama wrote: post #235
vasco wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should yours? It seemed like you liked musing about this topic so I added a bit. You (and I) have no idea if the universe is or not a computer. If you don't see the connection of free will to error margin of a deterministic system then I'm not sure how else to put it. Just imagine a deterministic program getting a bit flipped by a cosmic ray and turning non deterministic and apply that to the universe's system of…

>You (and I) have no idea if the universe is or not a computer. You actually cannot just say "Man, the universe is so complicated, so it is possible it could be anything!" That's a non-sequitur and not sound reasoning or logic.

I didn't say it could be anything - I said it could be a computer! I don't think the universe can be a towel for example.

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#265

Post by 7thaccount »

vidarh wrote: post #225
7thaccount wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I told you to close your eyes and think about your best friend's face....you cannot see ANYTHING?

No. Nothing. EDIT: This is a great article about Ed Catmull and aphantasia: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47830256

Interesting and thanks for answering.

If you're on HN, I assume this hasn't impacted you academically?

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#266

Post by vidarh »

7thaccount wrote: post #265
vidarh wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Nothing. EDIT: This is a great article about Ed Catmull and aphantasia: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-47830256

Interesting and thanks for answering. If you're on HN, I assume this hasn't impacted you academically?

No reason why it would. My abstract reasoning is far above average, and for that matter my ability to draw used to be far above average, though I'm a few decades out of practice. I "visualize" what things look like and where things are in relationship to each other in the sense that I know where things are with a level of precision well above average - I just can't see it in front of me, though I know where they are and what they look like.

I use the term "visualize" because that is what I thought people meant when they said to visualize or imagine things. I remember the shape of the visual rendition of source code, for example, and that is usually the basis for how I navigate large code bases. And I know what parts of papers I last read 30 years ago look like, but I can't see them.

I think the biggest way it has impacted me is that e.g. when it comes to fiction, I find visual descriptions of things usually bore me unless the language used in itself is particularly compelling because the words themselves are beautiful to me. So I often skip and skim visual descriptions.

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#267

Post by jjk166 »

EasyMark wrote: post #261
jjk166 wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is denying that tech transfer can be speech driven, but that doesn't mean that this particular increase in tech transfer was because of speech.

Right, but there are certainly going to be a ceiling to how far one can go. With writing it can be copied nearly verbatim and kept for centuries whereas the human mind is brittle and forgets, fuzzes, and randomly changes knowledge, it can contain only so much data.

That ceiling is pretty high above 18 steps for flint knapping.

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#268

Post by mistermann »

MeImCounting wrote: post #257
mistermann wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well most of the explanations I personally am interested in have a public and therefore high epistemic value. Since they are published and repeatable. Are you saying that these two claims have some sort of scientific ~proofs: 1.Thinking isn't even a path to "free will". 2a. Thinking is pretty clearly determined by exterior stimulus 2b. just like feeling is. Note: a definition for "determined by" (in percentage of t…

> Are you saying that these two claims have some sort of scientific ~proofs No. I think this statement is a conclusion only indirectly supported by scientific fact. This is a logical leap from more and more behaviors and internal states being correlated with various external stimulus over time. I believe it only a matter of time until it becomes entirely possible (though silly and will likely not be done because it o…

> I think this statement is a conclusion only indirectly supported by scientific fact.

Can you expand on this "supported by" scientific fact? Is it something more than is not inconsistent with, and more towards must be, necessarily?

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#269

Post by mistermann »

MeImCounting wrote: post #256
mistermann wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes what I am describing is my opinion Have you an opinion on whether your opinion is necessarily true? > If you think it does have bearing on such things I am totally interested in hearing how. I happen to believe humans have > 0 free will, and that if we do it derives from cognition, at least primarily. If this is the case, I believe that it would be advantageous to be able to exert control over cognition on dema…

So yeah I dont disagree with you that attempting to exert control over oneself is a desirable thing or that it generally results in things that wouldnt have happened if one didnt work to have control over ones cognition, behavior etc. This isn't at all at odds with my deterministic view in my opinion. I guess what I am asking is what is causing you to exert control over cognition? I would say its the sum of too many…

> ...or that it generally results in things that wouldnt have happened if one didnt work to have control over ones cognition, behavior etc. This isn't at all at odds with my deterministic view in my opinion.

Can you explain how it is not? As I see it, my theory is directly breaking out of determinism.

> I guess what I am asking is what is causing you to exert control over cognition?

Consciousness (self-awareness, will & determination, etc...the "how" of which I make no claims of knowledge about). I absolutely agree that it is substantially out of our control and thus at least semi-deterministic, where we would differ (at least) is on the 100% part.

There are many problems, here are some:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decidability_(logic)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity_and_sufficiency

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_and_indirect_realism

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotard%27s_syndrome

Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

#270

Post by pizzafeelsright »

EasyMark wrote: post #260
pizzafeelsright wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Language transmission for sure. The Tower of Babel slowed technology considerably and by design.

The Tower of Babel?

Genesis 11 in the Bible.

Men decide to build a tower to Heaven. God isn't having that so he scrambles every language so the workers can't communicate with each other. They put down their tools and migrate to other locations around the globe.

Post reply on HN