3 ms·

The richer oxygenation of the Earth's atmosphere in a previous geological era favoured the development of very large insects. Some wingspans attained 70cm! But

The richer oxygenation of the Earth's atmosphere in a previous geological era favoured the development of very large insects. Some wingspans attained 70cm! But the evolution of insectivorous birds likely favoured the smaller, nimbler insect variants.[1] And then there is historical climate change as factor, not to mention K-Pg Extinction. [2,3] [1] https://news.ucsc.edu/2012/06/giant-insects.html https://news.ucsc.edu/2012/06/giant-insects.html [2] https://www.sci.news/paleontology/ypresiosirex-orthosemos-giant-horntail-wood-wasps-03458.html https://www.sci.news/paleontology/ypresiosirex-orthosemos-gi... [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene_boundary https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous%E2%80%93Paleogene...

Brian_K_White 2y ago
[flagged]
- genericone 2y ago
  These topic-adjacent expert responses just reek of point harvesting by an LLM, I didn't do any such downvoting, but in the last year I've changed to this viewpoint.
  - brookst 2y ago
    Wait, so if it’s accurate, interesting, new to most of us, and adjacent to the topic… that’s a bad thing?
    - tptacek 2y ago
      It is if it's LLM-generated; strictly verboten on HN. This doesn't look like that to me though.
      - heresie-dabord 2y ago
        Good y'all, however much I (born human and have all my shots) may have the misfortune to attract downvotes, I'm not a fershlugginer LLM. (Not sure what this says about my social skills, no wonder my dance card is M.T.) I do think that it was an interesting addition to the discussion of giant buglies. I personally had never thought about how predation by birds would have pressured prehistoric insects... and made our feathered friends so specialised and good at what they do. Best human wishes!
        tptacek 2y ago
        I don't think you are! I was only moved to comment by the implication upthread that an informative LLM-generated comment might be welcome here. But yes, another HN norm is not making insinuations about commenters on threads (if people have concerns, they're meant to email hn@yc about it). And yet another norm is not to drive threads into their own navels with metacommentary, so here's where I should shut up.
        heresie-dabord 2y ago
        Props to thee, my friend. Maybe I'm the one who should refrain, it's a haywire timeline.
        scyzoryk_xyz 2y ago
        And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords
    - Gud 2y ago
      It's generally just barely on topic, generic fluff. Anything similar could have been posted, topic adjacent, without really contributing to the discussion. Remember we are on a discussion forum, not a place to dump data.
  - wkat4242 2y ago
    What's the point (pun intended) though? HN points don't net you anything. Except the first 500 maybe. I often roll a fresh account for privacy and the amount of points really don't bother me. But my point (sorry) is, why would someone even bother?
    - heresie-dabord 2y ago
      > HN points don't net you anything. Dang! I thought i was at least earning dang's respect. ^_^
    - vidarh 2y ago
      There's the leaderboard. Though the one time I noticed I'd showed up on it (others have long since overtaken me), it felt more like a warning I was spending too much time here.
      - potato3732842 2y ago
        I didn't know there was a leader board but now that I've looked at it I'm kind of disgusted by the fact that 20-ish percent of it is made up of names that are recognizable in an "oh, it's that guy who's always posting low effort links or riding the coat tails of a popular comment" way.
  - zeristor 2y ago
    Sounds like predation of HN by LLM is a bigger concern. One wonders when posts complaining about LLMs will be posted by a LLM. I’m just trying to imagine a LLM flame war.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
shiroiushi 2y ago
>The richer oxygenation of the Earth's atmosphere in a previous geological era favoured the development of very large insects. Some wingspans attained 70cm! This makes me wonder: what did these insects taste like? Notice that humans already eat several animals that are basically very large insects: shrimp/prawns, crabs, and lobsters. According to a quick google search, these crustaceans are basically a sister group to insects, and interestingly are more closely related to insects than spiders are. However, humans generally don't think of insects as appetizing meals, to put it mildly, while lobsters are considered a delicacy, and shrimp, crabs, and other crustaceans are not only commonly eaten, but are somewhat expensive food items. Of course, one of the big differences between insects and these crustaceans is the size: even small shrimp are very large compared to just about any insect, so most people generally don't eat the shell, but only the fleshy insides. This is even more true with lobsters, where the shell is very thick and hard and inedible. Doing this with a beetle or grasshopper isn't so easy. So if prehistoric insects could be so large, did they resemble sea crustaceans more (as far as having thicker shells, and more easily-separated meat)? And would humans find them tasty if we could somehow resurrect these giant insects today?
- jounker 2y ago
  There are plenty of places in the world where people do think of insects as tasty meals. I’ve eaten a variety of land arthropods, and many were quite good. While it took some mental fortitude to eat a deep fried scorpion, the flavor was really good. I’d describe it as smoky, nutty bean jerky paste inside crunchy fried chicken skin. I’d describe silk worm pupae fried with butter as having a flavor akin to nutty cheese. Grilled giant water bugs have a floral camphor note, but i find the wings a bit papery. There were these grubs/pupae that i had deep fried somewhere in rural thailand that were extraordinary. They had a nutty flavor and popped in your mouth. I have no idea what they were, but I could easily see having them instead of popcorn while watching a movie. Crickets grilled with in corn husks with basil and garlic are divine. The taste is subtle and nutty. I suspect that nutty would be a common adjective.
- thfuran 2y ago
  >According to a quick google search, these crustaceans are basically a sister group to insects Not group but subphylum. That's not a very close relation at all.

Brian_K_White 2y ago

[flagged]

genericone 2y ago
These topic-adjacent expert responses just reek of point harvesting by an LLM, I didn't do any such downvoting, but in the last year I've changed to this viewpoint.
- brookst 2y ago
  Wait, so if it’s accurate, interesting, new to most of us, and adjacent to the topic… that’s a bad thing?
  - tptacek 2y ago
    It is if it's LLM-generated; strictly verboten on HN. This doesn't look like that to me though.
    - heresie-dabord 2y ago
      Good y'all, however much I (born human and have all my shots) may have the misfortune to attract downvotes, I'm not a fershlugginer LLM. (Not sure what this says about my social skills, no wonder my dance card is M.T.) I do think that it was an interesting addition to the discussion of giant buglies. I personally had never thought about how predation by birds would have pressured prehistoric insects... and made our feathered friends so specialised and good at what they do. Best human wishes!
      - tptacek 2y ago
        I don't think you are! I was only moved to comment by the implication upthread that an informative LLM-generated comment might be welcome here. But yes, another HN norm is not making insinuations about commenters on threads (if people have concerns, they're meant to email hn@yc about it). And yet another norm is not to drive threads into their own navels with metacommentary, so here's where I should shut up.
        heresie-dabord 2y ago
        Props to thee, my friend. Maybe I'm the one who should refrain, it's a haywire timeline.
        scyzoryk_xyz 2y ago
        And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords
  - Gud 2y ago
    It's generally just barely on topic, generic fluff. Anything similar could have been posted, topic adjacent, without really contributing to the discussion. Remember we are on a discussion forum, not a place to dump data.
- wkat4242 2y ago
  What's the point (pun intended) though? HN points don't net you anything. Except the first 500 maybe. I often roll a fresh account for privacy and the amount of points really don't bother me. But my point (sorry) is, why would someone even bother?
  - heresie-dabord 2y ago
    > HN points don't net you anything. Dang! I thought i was at least earning dang's respect. ^_^
  - vidarh 2y ago
    There's the leaderboard. Though the one time I noticed I'd showed up on it (others have long since overtaken me), it felt more like a warning I was spending too much time here.
    - potato3732842 2y ago
      I didn't know there was a leader board but now that I've looked at it I'm kind of disgusted by the fact that 20-ish percent of it is made up of names that are recognizable in an "oh, it's that guy who's always posting low effort links or riding the coat tails of a popular comment" way.
- zeristor 2y ago
  Sounds like predation of HN by LLM is a bigger concern. One wonders when posts complaining about LLMs will be posted by a LLM. I’m just trying to imagine a LLM flame war.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

shiroiushi 2y ago

>The richer oxygenation of the Earth's atmosphere in a previous geological era favoured the development of very large insects. Some wingspans attained 70cm! This makes me wonder: what did these insects taste like? Notice that humans already eat several animals that are basically very large insects: shrimp/prawns, crabs, and lobsters. According to a quick google search, these crustaceans are basically a sister group to insects, and interestingly are more closely related to insects than spiders are. However, humans generally don't think of insects as appetizing meals, to put it mildly, while lobsters are considered a delicacy, and shrimp, crabs, and other crustaceans are not only commonly eaten, but are somewhat expensive food items. Of course, one of the big differences between insects and these crustaceans is the size: even small shrimp are very large compared to just about any insect, so most people generally don't eat the shell, but only the fleshy insides. This is even more true with lobsters, where the shell is very thick and hard and inedible. Doing this with a beetle or grasshopper isn't so easy. So if prehistoric insects could be so large, did they resemble sea crustaceans more (as far as having thicker shells, and more easily-separated meat)? And would humans find them tasty if we could somehow resurrect these giant insects today?

jounker 2y ago
There are plenty of places in the world where people do think of insects as tasty meals. I’ve eaten a variety of land arthropods, and many were quite good. While it took some mental fortitude to eat a deep fried scorpion, the flavor was really good. I’d describe it as smoky, nutty bean jerky paste inside crunchy fried chicken skin. I’d describe silk worm pupae fried with butter as having a flavor akin to nutty cheese. Grilled giant water bugs have a floral camphor note, but i find the wings a bit papery. There were these grubs/pupae that i had deep fried somewhere in rural thailand that were extraordinary. They had a nutty flavor and popped in your mouth. I have no idea what they were, but I could easily see having them instead of popcorn while watching a movie. Crickets grilled with in corn husks with basil and garlic are divine. The taste is subtle and nutty. I suspect that nutty would be a common adjective.
thfuran 2y ago
>According to a quick google search, these crustaceans are basically a sister group to insects Not group but subphylum. That's not a very close relation at all.