Learning about the navigational feats of animals • Hacker News Board

Re: Learning about the navigational feats of animals

#91

Post by _Microft » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 12:06 PM UTC

Roark66 wrote: post #90

_Microft wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard that most cats are actually found before they are lost, i.e. well-meaning people bringing them to an animal shelter while the cat would have been perfectly fine on their own. I can not say how they came to that conclusion (a guess: maybe by owners saying that it was perfectly normal for the cat to roam the same distances from home as when they were caught and brought to the shelter?)

I can definitely see how that could happen in many places,but very unlikely where I'm at. We don't even have a cat shelter in my area(dogs only - no idea why). Also, and that really pisses me off, people here are generally of the opinion every cat will happily survive on their own in the countryside which leads to people from cities abandoning unwanted cats (and dogs) here(this is how I got my first cat) . I even had…

I understand. Abandoning pets is terrible but a rather visible thing. For each abandoned animal there must be lots of pets living good lives with people who actually care if this is a relief.

From what I read lots of people got pets during the pandemic to have company at home. I worry a bit what will happen to them once people can resume their regular lifestyles.

Re: Learning about the navigational feats of animals

#92

Post by KMag » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 8:45 AM UTC

burnte wrote: post #67

KMag wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, I know lots of people who will walk 2 sides of a triangle because they know how to get from A to B and A to C, but just don't have a sense that B and C are rather close. I think they feel there's probably a shortcut between B and C, but they just don't have the sense of direction to just walk in the general direction from B toward C until things start looking familiar. I also can't count the number of tim…

I've had android phones for 11 years. Every single one gets my orientation wrong when driving but stopped. If I'm at an intersection stopped, and open Maps, it thinks I'm pointing in the direction opposite my real orientation EVERY SINGLE TIME. On all the phones I've had, I swear to god there's a flag on my google account that was used 11 years ago and fogotten about that fixed a bad compass or something.

Both my wife's iPhone and my Android phone frequently have their compasses incorrect when woken.

I remember early Android phones showing a short animation when opening Google Maps, showing one how to move the wrist in a figure-eight motion to orient the compass.

I don't think there was a setting. I think they just got rid of the animation showing you how to fix the compass.

Re: Learning about the navigational feats of animals

#93

Post by meowface » Mon, Apr 05, 2021, 7:33 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #88

meowface wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A closer analogy would be "Why people from country X steal" ("get lost" and "steal" are action statements), which, while initially a bit suspicious upon first look, isn't necessarily insulting. "Why people from country X steal - [Opening sentence] Due to unprecedented levels of corruption and cruelty by their new tyrannical government, a third of the population is starving from man-made famines, leaving many country…

> not necessarily xenophobic So, to be more specific, the following titles would not be necessarily xenophobic according to your argument: Why Indians cheat in exams . This is an article about one person of Asian origin that was found to cheat on an exam, and explores its family background and life history that lead to this situation. The author deplores that the young person had to resort to the sad practice of chea…

Key on the "not necessarily". It's not phrasing I would ever use, and if I saw it I'd recommend someone change it, but I don't think it necessarily implies anything; it's more like simple, dumb clickbait. I agree it'd probably still be generally considered offensive.

But it's also different because it's negative vs. positive attributes. Animals not getting lost is generally a positive trait. If you had a headline like:

>Why Indians do so well on exams

about them studying a lot or whatever (nothing to do with cheating or anything negative), then it's still probably clickbait-y, but not really offensive or unclear.

I think this is kind of a subtle grammar thing. "Why animals don't get lost" is a somewhat stylized phrasing (common among publications like The New Yorker), which if seen in that stylized context is likely intended to be interpreted as "Why [some/many] animals don't get lost".

Imagine a headline "Why people don't like chocolate". Most people probably like chocolate; some don't. The grammar isn't implying the group "people" does not like chocolate; the plural is referring to an arbitrary, floating bag or set wherein each person happens to not like chocolate. I think "Why animals don't get lost" is using that same kind of grammar.

They could've written "Why animals tend not to get lost", or "Why many animals don't get lost", but it doesn't look or sound as nice. But I'm sure the clickbaitiness was also a factor.