I agree with the overall argument of the article, but some of it is confusing in the point it's trying to make: > In these studies, chimps are behaving more ra

I agree with the overall argument of the article, but some of it is confusing in the point it's trying to make: > In these studies, chimps are behaving more rationally than humans. There is no wasted motion to obtain the reward. > Humans haven’t been successful because we are innovators. Rather, we are successful because we don’t think for ourselves, and save time and energy by copying others. > In contrast, children will copy every single action, including the unnecessary ones. Isn't the chimpanzee the one saving time/energy in this case since it's not engaging in superfluous activities and only doing what it's necessary for its goal? I was expecting the article to state that the point of human superfluous activity is that it allows for a greater range of experimentation (a superfluous activity might lead to an adjacent innovative/novel solution for a new goal that was outside of the original scope).