3 ms·

I think it has to be all completely historical. In some species the male is the suitor, in others, the female is; and there are - or used to be, sadly - enough

by mxkopy 5y ago

I think it has to be all completely historical. In some species the male is the suitor, in others, the female is; and there are - or used to be, sadly - enough species for every linear combination of both possibilities. If I know anything about nature, it's that it's a brute-force optimizer for biological fitness. Every possible combination of traits could feasibly be tested on these scales.

eru 5y ago
I don't think dzink's point relies on whether the suitor is male or female, but that the distinction exists at all and is so widespread. > [...] and there are - or used to be, sadly - enough species for every linear combination of both possibilities. Extinction is sad, but there's still plenty enough species to make this statement true. > If I know anything about nature, it's that it's a brute-force optimizer for biological fitness. Every possible combination of traits could feasibly be tested on these scales. Not quite. Eg there's basically no wheel in nature, despite the structure itself being quite simple. That's mostly because it's hard to evolve in small steps.
- mxkopy 5y ago
  >male or female, but that the distinction exists at all and is so widespread. Fair enough. I do find it interesting that even in plants that have N different sexes, their life cycles are still often dimorphic. Maybe the most fundamental abstraction really is the difference between a 1 and a 0.
  - dzink 5y ago
    There is also the third gender in domesticated animals: human breeders. Humans breeders are curating the species and easing the growth of human-favored varieties. There is also the interesting consequences of that in human-disfavored species who evolve to survive in distributed ways despite, or even possibly using our intelligence and tactics in their favor (cockroaches, rodents, viruses, parasites, kudzu, you name it). Nature is a massive calculator, and its algorithms are so interesting, we’ve got to test more of them in computing.
    - mxkopy 5y ago
      >There is also the interesting consequences of that in human-disfavored species who evolve to survive in distributed ways despite, or even possibly using our intelligence and tactics in their favor (cockroaches, rodents, viruses, parasites, kudzu, you name it). Nature and nurture. Gattica-level eugenics, at the end of the day, only affect the DNA. And eugenics will never save someone from the adage "Hard times make strong men. Strong men make good times. Good times make weak men. Weak men make hard times."
      - eru 5y ago
        Not sure that adage is any true? Eg western militaries don't seem to be worse at fighting than militaries from poor countries?
    - eru 5y ago
      Also have a look at rye and oats. They are both thought to be the result of Vavilovian mimicry. > In plant biology, Vavilovian mimicry (also crop mimicry or weed mimicry[1][a]) is a form of mimicry in plants where a weed evolves to share one or more characteristics with a domesticated plant through generations of artificial selection.[2] It is named after Nikolai Vavilov, a prominent Russian plant geneticist.[2] Selection against the weed may occur by killing a young or adult weed, separating its seeds from those of the crop (winnowing), or both. This has been done manually since Neolithic times, and in more recent years by agricultural machinery. > Vavilovian mimicry is a good illustration of unintentional selection by humans. Although the human selective agents might be conscious of their impact on the local weed gene pool, such effects go against the goals of those growing crops. Weeders do not want to select for weeds that are increasingly similar to the cultivated plant, yet the only other option is to let the weeds grow and compete with crops for sunlight and nutrients. Similar situations include antibiotic resistance and, also in agricultural crops, herbicide resistance. Having acquired many desirable qualities by being subjected to similar selective pressures, Vavilovian mimics may eventually be domesticated themselves. Vavilov called these weeds-become-crops secondary crops. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vavilovian_mimicry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vavilovian_mimicry
- d110af5ccf 5y ago
  > there's basically no wheel in nature Agreed, but V-ATPase is worth mentioning as it has a rotor and is very highly conserved. I guess it all depends on scale.
  - eru 5y ago
    Yes. I was talking about a macroscopic wheel.
- dwaltrip 5y ago
  Are wheels useful without roads?
  - eru 5y ago
    Agreed, wheels are less useful without roads. But there's some pretty flat natural territory out on earth, and some wheeled vehicles with rather good off-road capability.

by mxkopy 5y ago

eru 5y ago

I don't think dzink's point relies on whether the suitor is male or female, but that the distinction exists at all and is so widespread. > [...] and there are - or used to be, sadly - enough species for every linear combination of both possibilities. Extinction is sad, but there's still plenty enough species to make this statement true. > If I know anything about nature, it's that it's a brute-force optimizer for biological fitness. Every possible combination of traits could feasibly be tested on these scales. Not quite. Eg there's basically no wheel in nature, despite the structure itself being quite simple. That's mostly because it's hard to evolve in small steps.

mxkopy 5y ago
>male or female, but that the distinction exists at all and is so widespread. Fair enough. I do find it interesting that even in plants that have N different sexes, their life cycles are still often dimorphic. Maybe the most fundamental abstraction really is the difference between a 1 and a 0.
- dzink 5y ago
  There is also the third gender in domesticated animals: human breeders. Humans breeders are curating the species and easing the growth of human-favored varieties. There is also the interesting consequences of that in human-disfavored species who evolve to survive in distributed ways despite, or even possibly using our intelligence and tactics in their favor (cockroaches, rodents, viruses, parasites, kudzu, you name it). Nature is a massive calculator, and its algorithms are so interesting, we’ve got to test more of them in computing.
  - mxkopy 5y ago
    >There is also the interesting consequences of that in human-disfavored species who evolve to survive in distributed ways despite, or even possibly using our intelligence and tactics in their favor (cockroaches, rodents, viruses, parasites, kudzu, you name it). Nature and nurture. Gattica-level eugenics, at the end of the day, only affect the DNA. And eugenics will never save someone from the adage "Hard times make strong men. Strong men make good times. Good times make weak men. Weak men make hard times."
    - eru 5y ago
      Not sure that adage is any true? Eg western militaries don't seem to be worse at fighting than militaries from poor countries?
  - eru 5y ago
    Also have a look at rye and oats. They are both thought to be the result of Vavilovian mimicry. > In plant biology, Vavilovian mimicry (also crop mimicry or weed mimicry[1][a]) is a form of mimicry in plants where a weed evolves to share one or more characteristics with a domesticated plant through generations of artificial selection.[2] It is named after Nikolai Vavilov, a prominent Russian plant geneticist.[2] Selection against the weed may occur by killing a young or adult weed, separating its seeds from those of the crop (winnowing), or both. This has been done manually since Neolithic times, and in more recent years by agricultural machinery. > Vavilovian mimicry is a good illustration of unintentional selection by humans. Although the human selective agents might be conscious of their impact on the local weed gene pool, such effects go against the goals of those growing crops. Weeders do not want to select for weeds that are increasingly similar to the cultivated plant, yet the only other option is to let the weeds grow and compete with crops for sunlight and nutrients. Similar situations include antibiotic resistance and, also in agricultural crops, herbicide resistance. Having acquired many desirable qualities by being subjected to similar selective pressures, Vavilovian mimics may eventually be domesticated themselves. Vavilov called these weeds-become-crops secondary crops. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vavilovian_mimicry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vavilovian_mimicry
d110af5ccf 5y ago
> there's basically no wheel in nature Agreed, but V-ATPase is worth mentioning as it has a rotor and is very highly conserved. I guess it all depends on scale.
- eru 5y ago
  Yes. I was talking about a macroscopic wheel.
dwaltrip 5y ago
Are wheels useful without roads?
- eru 5y ago
  Agreed, wheels are less useful without roads. But there's some pretty flat natural territory out on earth, and some wheeled vehicles with rather good off-road capability.