5 ms·

Define "dominate". IMHO bacteria dominate the Earth, but of course, they don't know. They don't even need to know to dominate.

EpicEng 8y ago
>dom·i·nate >verb >have a commanding influence on; exercise control over. >be the most important or conspicuous person or thing in. Bacteria have a huge effect on all life, but they don't "exercise control" as they are not self aware. Their influence is comprised solely of externalities. Humans by comparison exert far more control over the environment around them. We shape the world to our purpose. I think humanity wins here.
- evv 8y ago
  Humanity may win here, but you should be careful about how you define it. Individual humans don't control much more of our environment than animals do. Like animals in a zoo, we are often born into very constrained situations that wildly limit our actual control. We are usually caged by our economic situation. What I'm saying is, the "human" does not dominate the earth. The corporation does. We shouldn't be afraid of loosing control to an AI that will rule our world, because we have already let the companies do whatever they want. Some of us are lucky enough to participate in this world, by forming and working for world-changing corporations, but everybody else is closer to the bacteria side of the spectrum.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    Tell that to the folks who invented agriculture. We were shaping the planet long before corporations existed. It's amazing how some people can turn any discussion into some version of a discussion on /r/LateStageCapitalism.
    - evv 8y ago
      Of course individuals shaped the planet long before corporations existed, but once people could organize and compete, individual farmers lost control.. right? These days, farmers are beholden to governments, banks, and agro companies, who use economical pressure to force specific behavior and crops. How much control do modern farmers really have over their farm? I haven't spent much time on that subreddit, but it sounds like I would feel at home there! It is incredibly important that we have each-other's backs.. humanity may technically be thriving, but most people are just trying to make ends meet.
      - EpicEng 8y ago
        >Of course individuals shaped the planet long before corporations existed, but once people could organize and compete, individual farmers lost control.. right? They didn't "lose control"; we discovered that, if we specialize, we can get more done and increase our standard of living. It's not all just farming either. You can see city lights from space. We have sculpted mountainsides. If I'm forced to go back to your angle, none of those things are possible with division of labor and a healthy economy. >These days, farmers are beholden to governments, banks, and agro companies, who use economical pressure to force specific behavior and crops. How much control do modern farmers really have over their farm? You're going off on some socioeconomic tangent when the discussion here is simply "which organism is most dominant." I don't see how anything you're saying is relevant. >humanity may technically be thriving, but most people are just trying to make ends meet. As they have been for all existence. The difference is that these days it's much easier than it used to be. For everyone. >I haven't spent much time on that subreddit, but it sounds like I would feel at home there! Ugh, enjoy.
    - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
      > Tell that to the folks who invented agriculture. Are you sure that agriculture isn't just grain's way of domesticating humans ;)
- B1FF_PSUVM 8y ago
  Meh. The biosphere, being generous and giving it 10 km depth and 10 km height (ocean trench, mountain peaks), is 20 km worth of skin on a 12 700 km diameter sphere. Less than an oily smear on a marble. "Saving the planet" is laughable, the planet could hiccup and wipe out all life and keep going as before ... ("Don't antropomorphize Nature, she hates that.")
- m0skit0 8y ago
  Sorry, I absolutely do not agree. 1) They do exercise control, self-aware or not. Your guts' bacteria control what you can eat or not. The environment bacteria control what diseases you can get and even if live or die. The bacteria decide what chemicals are to stay in the air or not, even what chemicals are released in the air, including the most extremely deadly toxins we know about (e.g. botulin, anthrax...). 2) Humans definitely do not exert far more control over the environment around them. You're talking about building and modifying the environment. Bacteria directly decide if there can be life or not in an environment, and even which forms can be alive or not. What nutrients will be available. What the air, water and earth chemical composition is going to be. Besides, many bacterias are apex predators. They do shape everything to fit their "wishes", even including human behavior since they make up 50% of your body, and that without counting the mitochondrion. So whatever we actually do as humans "controlling" the environment does not even come close to what bacteria control. 3) And finally, we can't get rid of all bacteria, ever, mainly because that would kill us as well. They could easily kill us all whenever they want to, and they won't even notice.
rafiki6 8y ago
I'd argue that domination requires agency. We want to dominate the earth and are doing it. Bacteria maybe more prevalent, but they haven't wiped us out yet. We on the other hand have wiped out several strains of bacteria.
- m0skit0 8y ago
  All living beings want to dominate, it's genetics: if you dominate you can pass down your genes easier. We definitely came close to being wiped out by bacteria. Several times. And no, we don't have more human "strains". Bacteria totally dominated us before antibiotics, and this hard conquered defense wall is already evaporating, and fast.
Florin_Andrei 8y ago
> bacteria dominate the Earth Or maybe the biochemistry of carbon really dominates. Or just the physics of atoms. Or quarks and the strong nuclear force. Things get more and more absurd as you're descending that ladder.

EpicEng 8y ago

>dom·i·nate >verb >have a commanding influence on; exercise control over. >be the most important or conspicuous person or thing in. Bacteria have a huge effect on all life, but they don't "exercise control" as they are not self aware. Their influence is comprised solely of externalities. Humans by comparison exert far more control over the environment around them. We shape the world to our purpose. I think humanity wins here.

evv 8y ago
Humanity may win here, but you should be careful about how you define it. Individual humans don't control much more of our environment than animals do. Like animals in a zoo, we are often born into very constrained situations that wildly limit our actual control. We are usually caged by our economic situation. What I'm saying is, the "human" does not dominate the earth. The corporation does. We shouldn't be afraid of loosing control to an AI that will rule our world, because we have already let the companies do whatever they want. Some of us are lucky enough to participate in this world, by forming and working for world-changing corporations, but everybody else is closer to the bacteria side of the spectrum.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  Tell that to the folks who invented agriculture. We were shaping the planet long before corporations existed. It's amazing how some people can turn any discussion into some version of a discussion on /r/LateStageCapitalism.
  - evv 8y ago
    Of course individuals shaped the planet long before corporations existed, but once people could organize and compete, individual farmers lost control.. right? These days, farmers are beholden to governments, banks, and agro companies, who use economical pressure to force specific behavior and crops. How much control do modern farmers really have over their farm? I haven't spent much time on that subreddit, but it sounds like I would feel at home there! It is incredibly important that we have each-other's backs.. humanity may technically be thriving, but most people are just trying to make ends meet.
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      >Of course individuals shaped the planet long before corporations existed, but once people could organize and compete, individual farmers lost control.. right? They didn't "lose control"; we discovered that, if we specialize, we can get more done and increase our standard of living. It's not all just farming either. You can see city lights from space. We have sculpted mountainsides. If I'm forced to go back to your angle, none of those things are possible with division of labor and a healthy economy. >These days, farmers are beholden to governments, banks, and agro companies, who use economical pressure to force specific behavior and crops. How much control do modern farmers really have over their farm? You're going off on some socioeconomic tangent when the discussion here is simply "which organism is most dominant." I don't see how anything you're saying is relevant. >humanity may technically be thriving, but most people are just trying to make ends meet. As they have been for all existence. The difference is that these days it's much easier than it used to be. For everyone. >I haven't spent much time on that subreddit, but it sounds like I would feel at home there! Ugh, enjoy.
  - fucking_tragedy 8y ago
    > Tell that to the folks who invented agriculture. Are you sure that agriculture isn't just grain's way of domesticating humans ;)
B1FF_PSUVM 8y ago
Meh. The biosphere, being generous and giving it 10 km depth and 10 km height (ocean trench, mountain peaks), is 20 km worth of skin on a 12 700 km diameter sphere. Less than an oily smear on a marble. "Saving the planet" is laughable, the planet could hiccup and wipe out all life and keep going as before ... ("Don't antropomorphize Nature, she hates that.")
m0skit0 8y ago
Sorry, I absolutely do not agree. 1) They do exercise control, self-aware or not. Your guts' bacteria control what you can eat or not. The environment bacteria control what diseases you can get and even if live or die. The bacteria decide what chemicals are to stay in the air or not, even what chemicals are released in the air, including the most extremely deadly toxins we know about (e.g. botulin, anthrax...). 2) Humans definitely do not exert far more control over the environment around them. You're talking about building and modifying the environment. Bacteria directly decide if there can be life or not in an environment, and even which forms can be alive or not. What nutrients will be available. What the air, water and earth chemical composition is going to be. Besides, many bacterias are apex predators. They do shape everything to fit their "wishes", even including human behavior since they make up 50% of your body, and that without counting the mitochondrion. So whatever we actually do as humans "controlling" the environment does not even come close to what bacteria control. 3) And finally, we can't get rid of all bacteria, ever, mainly because that would kill us as well. They could easily kill us all whenever they want to, and they won't even notice.

rafiki6 8y ago

I'd argue that domination requires agency. We want to dominate the earth and are doing it. Bacteria maybe more prevalent, but they haven't wiped us out yet. We on the other hand have wiped out several strains of bacteria.

m0skit0 8y ago
All living beings want to dominate, it's genetics: if you dominate you can pass down your genes easier. We definitely came close to being wiped out by bacteria. Several times. And no, we don't have more human "strains". Bacteria totally dominated us before antibiotics, and this hard conquered defense wall is already evaporating, and fast.

Florin_Andrei 8y ago

> bacteria dominate the Earth Or maybe the biochemistry of carbon really dominates. Or just the physics of atoms. Or quarks and the strong nuclear force. Things get more and more absurd as you're descending that ladder.