Live data from Hacker News

First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

mpg.de

121–128 of 128 posts

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to tie your research to the popular causes of the day. It would a bit far-fetched to tie it to gender and underrepresented minorities or online misinformation or covid, so the nearest possible "serious issue of our time" is climate change.

What on earth has happened to HN comments over the last couple of months? Every post I've opened today has had this same kind of "half-joking-but-not-really SJWs are bad" comment on something completely unrelated.

I touched in this subject the other day in a deep thread full of flaggings, since HN is [primarily] user moderated, these kind of comments seem like they must be here because enough users either want them here, or don’t care either way. Otherwise they’d be flagged as they do violate guildines.

As to why they’ve been like this recently, I can’t tell for sure. I feel like it’s been a bit kore than just a few months though, obviously 2020 was a US election cycle and things tend to get dicey around those times. I recall in both 2016 and 2020 people getting upset by the low quality threads, and other attempted to placate them by swearing it’d be over in a few months. Now it’s been more than a few months at this point, but there was also so much more than an election cycle in 2020 to cause political division.

Which leads to another point. HN is explicitly not a venue for politics, but politics infects everything so it gets complicated. For example, are political threads related to tech and startups off topic? I wouldn’t say no offhand, but there certainly have been an increase in the number of inheritor political threads that I’d personally consider this not the place for. Often this is justified by a lax interpretation of “anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity” (note though that the sort of threads I’m thinking of almost never contain inquisitive or intellectual discussion) from the submission guidelines. So if political threads are more common and more accepted, that’s going to invite all the sort of antics you get with internet politics including the sort of comment you mention in your comment. Some of the most egregious stuff will get flagged, but some surprisingly bad comments can stay upvoted if the opinion expressed resonates with enough of the community.

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please show me where in my comment above I say that "science is "opinion of experts"? If I haven't said that in my comment, would you say I'm obliged to reply to your comment and explain why I'm not, in fact, "doing it wrong"? Do you agree that when having a conversation one should reply to what one's interlocutor has actually said, and not what one thinks has been said? >> Science isn't about authority or ex…

> Can you please show me where in my comment above I say that "science is "opinion of experts"? Right here: "What's hasty is the easy dismissal of the *opinion of experts* on a subject ... When did HN become so anti-science?" > The people who have deep knowledge of a subject of scientific inquiry, we call "experts". Those "experts" said that Jews, Slavs, and African Americans were stupid and inferior to Anglo-Saxons,…

>> Right here: "What's hasty is the easy dismissal of the opinion of experts on a subject ... When did HN become so anti-science?"

So you choose to misrepresent what I said? Disappointing.

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#123
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate that you're trying to combat the anti-science shallow/kneejerk critiques, but this is not the way. You're feeding trolls by the handful. Here, you're jumping to conclusions just to dunk on somebody. Please pick your battles more carefully so you can be more deliberate as you wage them.

But its true? This research organization doesn't have to beg for short-term or 3rd party research money? Also, I'm really pissed and also I'm kind of convinced that its too late anyways to try to convince someone who says stuff like that that they're not right. The only thing that can still be done is trying to keep more people from getting sucked into that black hole. The best way to do this seems to be to de-platfo…

As a third party reading through, I find your comments more alienating than endearing. You are actively harming the cause you support.

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to tie your research to the popular causes of the day. It would a bit far-fetched to tie it to gender and underrepresented minorities or online misinformation or covid, so the nearest possible "serious issue of our time" is climate change.

What on earth has happened to HN comments over the last couple of months? Every post I've opened today has had this same kind of "half-joking-but-not-really SJWs are bad" comment on something completely unrelated.

I don't know what others do, I've been commenting on various technical things too. I wouldn't categorize this as "SJW bad". It's a related but not the same phenomenon.

And it's also quite usual that these kinds of press releases have to include some political punchline, to confirm being on the right side of history and so on. It's predictable.

Maybe it's totally benign in this case. But I've been duped so many times that I discount any such claim which ties into these "serious respectable talking points". I'm planning to take a look at Lawrence Krauss' now book on climate change, that dude still seems to have his head screwed on the right way.

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#125
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Chimps will eat gorilla infants. So if the attack was over a scarcity of food resources you'd expect the killed infant to be eaten. This was only observed in 1/2 the encounters... > Between 2014 and 2018, we observed nine direct interactions between individuals of the Rekambo community and unhabituated gorillas (N=9; see Fig. 1). These events were always peaceful, and occasionally involved co-feeding in fruit…

The non-eating attack resulted in chimpanzee injuries. They very well could have been chased away and/or too busy nursing injuries.

I'm anthropomorphizing but it doesnt seem very primate-like not to enjoy the spoils of a hard won victory.

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and why is it an important issue? In part because of the ecological stresses it causes, which results in less supply of resources in a given ecological niche. Seems entirely reasonable to hypothesise the cause of aggression being related to this. That's not something they tested, merely a proposed hypothesis.

It's a convenient hypothesis, given the ubiquity of climate change impacts, but also a lazy one, like blaming the aggression on something equally as prevalent and relevant to the situation, like chimp genetics. The hypothesis is untestable absent some other specific assertions, and therefore unscientific.

Testability and a better understanding of how resource limitations impact intraspecific competition is one of the big questions of community ecology.

Sorry, sometimes the convenient hypothesis is a good one. It's just hard to test, since we cannot spin up Earth 2. That's one of the hard parts of ecology.

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know many humans who get very grumpy on an empty stomach.

How is the behavior of some random humans relevant here?

That hunger drives aggression? In monkey as in humans?

Re: First lethal attacks by chimpanzees on gorillas observed

#128
post #13

> "Whether this behavior is due to competition for food or to the decline of the rainforest's productivity caused by climate change will now be investigated in more detail." Declaring the cause must be food competition or climate change seems a bit hasty? These are complex social animals. Given this is the only attack ever observed, it seems possible to me that there are a myriad of plausible one-off explanations. Pe…

>> Declaring the cause must be food competition or climate change seems a bit hasty? It's not a declaration, but a hypothesis that attempts to explain the observations according to prior knowledge. It "will now be investigated in more detail" to try and disprove it. That's bog standard scientific work. What's hasty is the easy dismissal of the opinion of experts on a subject most commenters here are probably unfamlia…

People who participate in HN are not a monolithic bloc, not everyone reads the words the same way or thinks about them the same way.

I think “climate change” is a bit indirect as a topic myself, would love to hear something about how these encounters would be directly caused by a change in temperatures, humidity, rainfall and the like. Non-human primates don’t share our politics. Food pressure or loss of habitat might cause more of these encounters, and those could attribute to climate change, that’s indirect.

Gangs of adult male chimpanzees can be right assholes. Pinning down another chimp and tearing its rectum, among other violent indignities, suggests that they’re capable of lots of other violence.

Post reply on HN