Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase • Hacker News Board

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#51

Post by maratd » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 2:24 AM UTC

ogoffart wrote: post #34

maratd wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Experiments, both on humans and other animals, have repeatedly shown that there is no such thing as pure-as-white-snow altruism. Whatever appears to be altruistic is either a misfire (essentially error, in biological terms) or is found to be long-term self-interested behavior. That billionaire is giving his wealth away because he wants better social standing, etc. In the end, evolution doesn't favor altruism and we h…

Imagine you have a gene that will make half of your kids very strong, but unable to reproduce. Because of the tendency to protect the familly, your strong kids might help their sibilings to survive and reproduce, propagating their genes. Another example is the ants. A gene that gives workers good abilities will help the hole colony, even if the worker themself do not reproduce.

It's better to think of a hive of ants/bees/etc. as a single organism. The individuals are cells. Things make much more sense in that context.

You're previous point, though, is spot on. In fact, I think we have genes just like that and not with regard to just strength. You might have a brother who becomes very famous because he's bright/sociable/etc. and your business prospers in the process, allowing you to have more kids. He wins that way, although indirectly. I think this happens a lot.

That's why it's such a pain to talk about these things in such simplistic terms ... life is just so much more complex and frankly, the evolutionary process is so brutal that there really aren't any losing strategies around. You can bet if somebody is doing something, they're benefiting somehow ... we just don't know how yet.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#52

Post by seanmcdirmid » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 2:26 AM UTC

Scriptor wrote: post #18

maratd wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't stress enough how important it is to read Darwin's original work. Contemporary understanding of evolution outside of academia is deeply flawed . There are two forces at work in evolution. Natural selection (survival of the fittest) and sexual selection (reproduction of the sexiest). Out of the two, natural selection is by far the weaker force. > Intelligence and other positive characteristics don't seem to ge…

It's rather odd when someone says natural selection is completely 'dead'. Do they think everyone in the world has an equal chance of finding a partner and has the same number of children? Of course not. Even to this day there are factors that determine whose genes are passed down more frequently than others. I can't stress this enough, but there is simply no goal for evolution. Up until relatively recently, it just s…

As parent informed us, mate selection is called "sexual selection" and is a force that complements, but is not the same, as "natural selection."

It is good to know the name for that.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#53

Post by pyre » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 2:32 AM UTC

mdda wrote: post #50

pyre wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Artificial interference is going to kick in long > before that If we're constantly 20 - 30 years away from a major break-through, it will eventually come true! ;-)

Since we're talking about human evolution, time-scales of 20-30 years are only 1 generation changes. Machine evolution may have a much shorter generational cycle - but for the moment, it doesn't seem too much to ask to be a little patient. Machines have come a long way in the last 4 human generations...

I was referring to the constant claims that we're X years away from a break-through for the last Y years.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#54

Post by lotharbot » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 3:01 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #49

potatolicious wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Survival" in the evolutionary sense is not "survival" in the social sense. Natural selection only works if unfit individuals are killed off prior to breeding . I don't think it's a stretch to say that, even in the least developed areas of the world, this is no longer the general case. Humans are no longer subject to natural selection, since nearly everyone survives to breed.

> Natural selection only works if unfit individuals are killed off prior to breeding. That's not true. Even in the hypothetical scenario that all humans reproduced exactly enough to replace themselves then died immediately (i.e. a completely constant human population), there would almost certainly be gradual change in the inheritable traits of the human population (i.e. evolution). If sexual partners are chosen, and…

If genes change in proportion because they make people more or less likely to reproduce, that's "natural selection".

If the genes change in proportion just due to randomness (they're all equally fit, but some were passed on more times than others as a fluke), we call it "genetic drift" [0].

Evolution involves mutation and gene flow [1] adding new genes to a population, and natural selection and genetic drift changing the relative proportion of various genes within the population.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_flow

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#55

Post by jnhnum1 » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 3:12 AM UTC

unoti wrote: post #5

It seems to me that natural selection is, for the most part, broken now for humans. Intelligence and other positive characteristics don't seem to get involved in whether they have surviving offspring today the way I imagine it did a few thousand years ago. Is it true that natural selection for humans is mostly dead? Perhaps I'm wrong about this, but it's something that interests and concerns me.

One thing the article mentioned was that people are choosing not to have kids. In this case, it seems that there should be an extremely high selection pressure for people to be genetically more predisposed to want kids. And if this does evolve to be the case, then as long as technology does not make reproduction free (in economic terms, there is currently a finite "supply" - the number of fertile women in the world times one baby per year), then competition on other traits will begin to be more relevant.

So while people are saying that evolution is "selecting for less intelligence", this may be a short-term effect in which we are first as a species shifting to stronger reproductive urges at the expense of general intelligence, and only then increasing intelligence in a way which doesn't allow philosophical objections to having children.

But evolution is pretty complicated, and difficult to reason about. Other people have also mentioned the "selfish gene" effect, in which altruistic / kinship behavior can be good for a gene, but suboptimal for an individual. It's possible some weird effect like that is going on also.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#56

Post by jsankey » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 3:33 AM UTC

busyant wrote: post #13

wwwtyro wrote: post #3

I hate to sound unimpressed, but does biological evolution strike anyone else as rather irrelevant, now? I doubt we will be held hostage by these mortal coils for much longer.

> biological evolution strike anyone else as rather irrelevant, now? Depends. I can envision a lot of scenarios where infectious disease wreaks havoc on our species. Random mutation might have a significant impact on who would survive such a scenario and I don't think we (as a species) are anywhere near being able to circumvent natural selection of a sufficiently dire infectious disease. jmho

Indeed, and a very real scenario that is already starting to play out is the evolution of bacteria outpacing development of new antibiotics. We've quickly forgotten the impact these diseases had just a century ago, and without further breakthroughs (which of course are very possible) we could easily see, e.g. TB return as a major cause of death worldwide (i.e. even in developed countries).

It's not only our own biological evolution that deeply affects us.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#57

Post by emmelaich » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 3:34 AM UTC

maratd wrote: post #10

unoti wrote: post #5

It seems to me that natural selection is, for the most part, broken now for humans. Intelligence and other positive characteristics don't seem to get involved in whether they have surviving offspring today the way I imagine it did a few thousand years ago. Is it true that natural selection for humans is mostly dead? Perhaps I'm wrong about this, but it's something that interests and concerns me.

I can't stress enough how important it is to read Darwin's original work. Contemporary understanding of evolution outside of academia is deeply flawed . There are two forces at work in evolution. Natural selection (survival of the fittest) and sexual selection (reproduction of the sexiest). Out of the two, natural selection is by far the weaker force. > Intelligence and other positive characteristics don't seem to ge…

I you consider the gene as a the unit of selection then it is not necessary to have children for selection to occur.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#58

Post by yen223 » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 3:44 AM UTC

hnriot wrote: post #6

wwwtyro wrote: post #3

I hate to sound unimpressed, but does biological evolution strike anyone else as rather irrelevant, now? I doubt we will be held hostage by these mortal coils for much longer.

Anyone that thinks their smartphone and self driving car will in any way impact the evolutionary pressures is very self deluded. Evolution will act on our species' population for many hundreds of centuries before any significant impact from technology is seen. Also I am not sure you understand what "mortal coil" means: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_coil

> Also I am not sure you understand what "mortal coil" means

I'd like to think it is a poetic reference to our DNA.

To stay on topic, I agree with the parent. I think we have reached a point where our genetic makeup is no longer the primary factor determining our destiny as a species.

One could say that intelligent design now trumps evolution, as it were.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#59

Post by mahyarm » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 4:19 AM UTC

robertk wrote: post #43

mahyarm wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would silicon avoid something like cancer? Why would that make any difference?

Backups. If you can backup someone's brain (which should be doable in silicon), then even if they contract cancer, you can simply back them up for a few hundred years (or however long it takes) until there's a cure.

Oh I thought you meant the more literal substance, not making a software simulation reproduction.

Re: Human Evolution Enters an Exciting New Phase

#60

Post by tmh88j » Fri, Nov 30, 2012, 4:40 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #45

tmh88j wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It doesn't matter how hot, strong, or brilliant you are, if you have zero kids, from an evolutionary perspective ... it's the same as if you were killed and eaten by some wild animal. I don't agree with that 100% (the same as just dying part), solely because of the technology and globalization that we currently live with. Even if you don't have children, by simply starting a business where you employ many people, yo…

Sure, you can do all those great things, but your genes won't pass to the next generation unless you reproduce. Evolution is a specific thing: the ongoing change in the inheritable traits of a population. Humanitarian efforts are great, but they have nothing to do with evolution in this context.

> but your genes won't pass to the next generation unless you reproduce.

The comment on which I commented said something along the lines of "you might as well just die if you don't reproduce", in reference to evolution. Yes, that is true (in regards to carrying on genes), but that's not the point I was making. I essentially said in today's world, if you're successful in establishing a business which creates jobs, you are essentially harboring other's abilities to reproduce. I guess you could say you can "indirectly reproduce" due to globalization and technology.