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

Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 250 posts

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#61

Post by nxzero »

Falling3 wrote: post #48
maxxxxx wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What else do you want to use?

Sentience - I really don't see any other sensible qualifier for moral consideration.

Sentience is central to the philosophy of animal rights, because sentience is necessary for the ability to suffer, and thus is held to confer certain rights.

That said, in my opinion, as it relates to optimal ecosystems, sentience at best might be a consideration.

Impact, contribution, etc. to an ecosystem would be a more natural measure.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#62

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #55
mrfusion wrote: post #40

Amazing. Most humans couldnt come up with an escape plan like this. It's possible he exhibiting long term goal oriented planning here. Have we considered octopi might actually be more intelligent than humans? Wouldn't it be funny if in the future we figured out how to communicate with them and they ended up solving our hardest problems or making breakthroughs in physics and math?

Octopi aren't more intelligent than humans, because intelligence in humans is partly external. We're fairly dumb as feral individuals, but give us a herd memory for science and math and we can fly to the moon. Octopi not only don't live very long, they're also aggressively solitary. So they have the usual smart-animal problem of starting life as a blank slate with a few baked-in instincts and no way to learn from pre…

But what if they CAN fly to the moon but have decided not to because they realise it's a very big mistake ...

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#63

Post by theandrewbailey »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #53
tracyshaun wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do octopi have a sense of smell? Maybe it/he/she could sense it in some way, or just noticed that when water flowed in the room, it all went down that drain. "I'll go where the water goes!" In that vein, how often do octopi get out of the water (except when being brought out by humans)? And, are they aware of "water" vs "not-water"? I already lmgtfy.com'ed all of these... just adding to the discussion.

Scents do not travel back up a drain pipe, and I doubt that sounds or other effects do, either. And while a lost human might reason about following a river to civilization, I don't think there are similar drains in the ocean. If it made that connection, I am seriously impressed! While that's a well known tactic for explorers, many lost humans don't know it and don't figure it out! My leading guess, though, is that he…

> Scents do not travel back up a drain pipe, and I doubt that sounds or other effects do, either.

Properly engineered drains are, especially if they have traps. You must hang around different drains than I.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#64

Post by Falling3 »

koolba wrote: post #50
sarreph wrote: post #7

It upsets me to no end that we find evidence such as this piece that cephalopods are actually (relatively speaking) remarkably more intelligent than common wisdom pertains[0], and yet the culinary abuse and harm (i.e. 'live sushi/sashimi') of these creatures continues. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephalopod_intelligence

Are you against eating all animals or is there a cut off point of intelligence after which it stops being okay? Most of what is/isn't acceptable to eat is based on history and popular socially accepted practices, not whether people think their prospective dinner is intelligent. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs yet the latter are not eaten in the western world and I wouldn't want to live in a world without the (del…

Agreed with everything up until your last sentiment. I assume it was hyperbole, but it's still a ridiculous notion that without this specific food item (that currently requires harming other sentient, intelligent individuals), that life would not be worth living.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#65

Post by cloudjacker »

sarreph wrote: post #7

It upsets me to no end that we find evidence such as this piece that cephalopods are actually (relatively speaking) remarkably more intelligent than common wisdom pertains[0], and yet the culinary abuse and harm (i.e. 'live sushi/sashimi') of these creatures continues. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephalopod_intelligence

Relatively speaking? I think Cephalopods are smarter than humans, with their life span of 3 - 5 years their cognitive intelligence I think meets or exceeds most toddlers.

They decide to die by starvation after laying eggs and the majority of the babies are killed while they are defenseless.

With any organization and cognition that they don't have to die at this point in their life, they could perhaps take over the ocean.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#67

Post by koolba »

Falling3 wrote: post #64
koolba wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you against eating all animals or is there a cut off point of intelligence after which it stops being okay? Most of what is/isn't acceptable to eat is based on history and popular socially accepted practices, not whether people think their prospective dinner is intelligent. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs yet the latter are not eaten in the western world and I wouldn't want to live in a world without the (del…

Agreed with everything up until your last sentiment. I assume it was hyperbole, but it's still a ridiculous notion that without this specific food item (that currently requires harming other sentient, intelligent individuals), that life would not be worth living.

> Agreed with everything up until your last sentiment. I assume it was hyperbole, but it's still a ridiculous notion that without this specific food item (that currently requires harming other sentient, intelligent individuals), that life would not be worth living.

I didn't say it wouldn't be worth living. I said that, given the choice, I'd rather live in a world with ham, bacon, and baby back ribs.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#68

Post by kristopolous »

koolba wrote: post #50
sarreph wrote: post #7

It upsets me to no end that we find evidence such as this piece that cephalopods are actually (relatively speaking) remarkably more intelligent than common wisdom pertains[0], and yet the culinary abuse and harm (i.e. 'live sushi/sashimi') of these creatures continues. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephalopod_intelligence

Are you against eating all animals or is there a cut off point of intelligence after which it stops being okay? Most of what is/isn't acceptable to eat is based on history and popular socially accepted practices, not whether people think their prospective dinner is intelligent. Pigs are more intelligent than dogs yet the latter are not eaten in the western world and I wouldn't want to live in a world without the (del…

Although not the OP, I have a fairly strong opinion on this. In order of importance everyone should

* Make their own decisions on what to eat.

* Understand the externalities, exogenous, and endogenous process and consequences of their decisions.

* Take full personal, civic, and environmental responsibility for those decisions.

Essentially, as long as people are forthright, honest, and accountable about what they eat, where it comes from, and the ecological footprints their choices implicate, then have at it, eat whatever.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#69

Post by hackbinary »

pera wrote: post #30
Cpoll wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ten minutes of animal cruelty involved in eating a live octopus doesn't phase me compared to the life-long animal cruelty most farm animals suffer. The only reason it's more outrageous is because it's 'obvious,' I imagine. In the West, we like our animal cruelty to be kept strictly behind closed doors.

I believe in the West most people don't even want to think about it.

Seriously? I think people in the west generally care more about animal welfare than in the far east. The UK has the highest animal welfare standards in the world. Sure there are people, farmers and pet keepers that do not obey the law, but in the main animals are very well taken care of.

Re: Inky the octopus breaks out of New Zealand aquarium

#70

Post by Falling3 »

nxzero wrote: post #61
Falling3 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sentience - I really don't see any other sensible qualifier for moral consideration.

Sentience is central to the philosophy of animal rights, because sentience is necessary for the ability to suffer, and thus is held to confer certain rights. That said, in my opinion, as it relates to optimal ecosystems, sentience at best might be a consideration. Impact, contribution, etc. to an ecosystem would be a more natural measure.

Does that actually matter in and of itself beyond how it affects sentient individuals?
Post reply on HN