• 2 Posts
  • 33 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: May 8th, 2024

help-circle

  • When a drivers license is taken or suspended, especially for speeding in cities, give an easy option to directly… lease(?)1 an e-bike. And then suspend licenses for a lot more of the dangerous behaviors we currently just accept.

    A relative got her license suspended for a month for speeding, and then simply did not go anywhere. Having an exciting new mode of transport might have just been what she needed, the supermarket is just 2km away.

    1: The state can hammer out the details, obviously we don’t want to gift them it or it becomes a reward for speeding, and selling them it means they could just resell it afterwards when the goal is that they keep and use it. Maybe like a 5 year ban on reselling it, only one per household. Also, probably keep the model generic and discreet so no shame is cast when just trying to buy groceries.




  • I never said that. What I meant is that a behaviour, which benefits a species as a whole but reduces one individual’s fitness, is not evolutionary competitive. It’s evolutionary game theory, like the prisoners dilemma from normal game theory.

    And to determine if some behaviour is such a dilemma, you have to consider costs and benefits of it, which is not at all clear in natural situations. That’s why I said it needs to be studied.

    But I must concede, I sort of assumed what exactly you called an evolutionary advantage. Common homosexuality in penguins or not discriminating against homosexual individuals in penguins have very different analysis here.


  • Tudsamfa@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzPenguins ❤️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    I’d be cautious with saying evolutionary advantage here.

    I don’t believe the “Gay Uncle hypothesis” any more than the somewhat debunked “Grandmother Hypothesis”, which aimed to explain menopause with biological altruism. Just because we could think of a way in that it might be advantageous for a species doesn’t mean it’s advantageous for an individuals fitness.

    Of course, it can be still an advantage, but we’d only know with more free, uncensored research.






  • I think that is thinking a bit too narrow. A lot of the stuff we use today might just be our bronze to our successors iron - you can build an unstable society on either. And what we do use up today could still work if used more efficiently - we might not have enough rare metals to give everyone a smartphone in the post-post-apocalypse, but I could see us still launching satellites if only big governments had computers - because they did.



  • We have had Millions of years of (presumably) intelligent Dinosaurs on this planet, but only 200.000 years of mankind were enough to create Civilization IV, the best Strategy game and peak of life as we know it.

    So clearly, Civilization™ is what sets us apart.

    Jokes aside, the thing evolution on earth spend the most time on is getting from single celled life-forms to multicellular life (~2 billion years). If what earth life found difficult is difficult for all, multicellular collaboration is way harder than photosynthesis, which evolved roughly half a billion years after life formed.


  • A filter for sure, but not a great one. Call me optimistic, but I don’t think that will set us back more than 10.000 years. If humanity can survive, society will re-emerge, and we are back here 2-3000 years into the future.

    Is +5°C Earth a good place to be? No. Will the majority of humans die? Absolutely. Will the descendants get to try this society thing again? I believe so.

    On a cosmic scale 10.000 years is just a setback, and cannot be considered a great filter.








  • The left-leaning parties disappointed me with their posters this election. There was 1 that said “Set a mark against fascists” and showed an anti-afd protest, and another with a similar message.

    I know they are the nazi party, I want to know what YOU stand for. I’ll have to guess political scientist found out nobody really changes their mind from a poster, so the only thing they do is remind people of their party that they need to go out and vote.

    If that’s the case, the poster may be better than I give it credit for. Still, doesn’t seem to have worked.