Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
I think this goes here:

IMG_20200215_161410.jpg
 
  • 10Worf
  • 1Solidarity
  • 1Like
Reactions: 12 users

Tholan

Blackwing Lair Raider
782
1,485
I think this goes here:

View attachment 249390

Although this indeed doesn't help, I'm sure he wasn't talking about the price. I cant remember the last time I said "damn I need to find "Near-UV Irradiation Effects on Pentacene-Based Organic Thin Film Transistors" article but it costs 10$ !".
If you reaaaaally need to know, you'll spend 10 bucks or ask someone at your local university.
 

pharmakos

soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
<Bronze Donator>
16,306
-2,237
I think this goes here:

View attachment 249390
Although this indeed doesn't help, I'm sure he wasn't talking about the price. I cant remember the last time I said "damn I need to find "Near-UV Irradiation Effects on Pentacene-Based Organic Thin Film Transistors" article but it costs 10$ !".
If you reaaaaally need to know, you'll spend 10 bucks or ask someone at your local university.

or just go on Sci Hub

it's like The Pirate Bay, but for peer reviewed papers

oh and it has literally everything
 

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,431
73,493
You know how I know you didn't read the article?
I read the article and found what was linked didn't substantiate the headline. When i looked into her research it's hard to really describe what these bees are doing as "math" in except the most generous of definitions.

swnov2018c.png

I'm no bee expert, but bees are magnificent creatures that will trek across vast and complex distances to pick out a patch of clover that their granddaddy told them about one time.

Picking the big triangle sometimes and the small one other times is just an adaptation of that, not the mastery of a building block of abstract thought.

Scarlet howard is a hot woman in stem tho, so im sure she'll get infinite funding to fuck around with bees for another decade or two.
 

khorum

Murder Apologist
24,338
81,363
Anyone else following the Twitter meltdowns after Dawkins posted this?

No that's NOT why it wouldn't work for humans. We aren't fucking livestock or pets. We have to produce offspring who must COMPETE to carry on our genetic legacy. Cows, chickens and poodles no longer have to compete; they just have to be DELICIOUS or adorable. That's because the selective pressures that govern their existence are no longer natural...they live or die depending on artificial human needs.

Eugenics or any other kind of socio-genetic engineering would produce humans who are selected for artificial standards of fitness, NOT the nature's unsympathetic rigor. And they'd fare as well as chickens or cows would in competition with buffalos or hawks: not very well at all.

Eugenics makes POODLES; nature demands wolves. A CRISPR-edited society would be pruned of the "harsh edges" that make humans competitive on nature's terms, but less attractive on human terms. They'd make limp-wristed socially-mobile cuckfaggots; more gracious, more "emotionally accessible" and less toxic and abrasive. But then they'd fare about as well as poodles would when the wolves come.

We must remain wolves.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
I read the article and found what was linked didn't substantiate the headline. When i looked into her research it's hard to really describe what these bees are doing as "math" in except the most generous of definitions.

swnov2018c.png

I'm no bee expert, but bees are magnificent creatures that will trek across vast and complex distances to pick out a patch of clover that their granddaddy told them about one time.

Picking the big triangle sometimes and the small one other times is just an adaptation of that, not the mastery of a building block of abstract thought.

Scarlet howard is a hot woman in stem tho, so im sure she'll get infinite funding to fuck around with bees for another decade or two.
Her research isnt about teaching bees math though. Its about measuring their numerical cognition. The title of that article is whatever, the subtitle refers to the bees doing basic arithmetic. The second paragraph links to two of her studies


and


neither of which is about doing math. One is about the bees ability to recognize zero as less than any other value and the other the ability to determine when adding or subtracting 1 leads to a preferable outcome. Both suggest that bees posses numerical cognition on the level of parrots, non human primates and small human children, a fact which makes bees an excellent model organism for numerical cognition.

However, as excellent as bees are, even they would not refer to Ms Howard as hot. She is a 6.
 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,431
73,493
Her research isnt about teaching bees math though. Its about measuring their numerical cognition. The title of that article is whatever, the subtitle refers to the bees doing basic arithmetic. The second paragraph links to two of her studies


and


neither of which is about doing math. One is about the bees ability to recognize zero as less than any other value and the other the ability to determine when adding or subtracting 1 leads to a preferable outcome. Both suggest that bees posses numerical cognition on the level of parrots, non human primates and small human children, a fact which makes bees an excellent model organism for numerical cognition.

However, as excellent as bees are, even they would not refer to Ms Howard as hot. She is a 6.
I don't know what is more intelligent, trying to find pictures of her with makeup or a swimsuit, or reading a paper i probably dont have the education to comprehend so i can argue whether these bees are adding numbers or just performing basic pattern recognition that isn't actually numerical cognition.
 

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,431
73,493
0868bebd26b9f72cf8bcc531f8f9a45b2a0e491bd036cf069e087a0ffe60ca04_image.jpg


This is an eight on the normal scale and a solid ten on the chicks in bee suits scale.
 

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner
<Gold Donor>
16,820
30,964
0868bebd26b9f72cf8bcc531f8f9a45b2a0e491bd036cf069e087a0ffe60ca04_image.jpg


This is an eight on the normal scale and a solid ten on the chicks in bee suits scale.
I applaud your choice of intelligent tasks.

Here is an excerpt from the paper on addition/subtraction that explains the procedure performed:

'To solve the task, the bees were required to either add or subtract the value of one to this sample number depending on the color of the elements (Fig. 1). Bees would then fly through the next hole in the Y-maze and into the decision chamber where they could simultaneously view two stimuli in a dual choice test. If the sample number was blue, then the bee would need to choose the option that was one element greater than the sample stimulus to receive a reward, while if the sample number was yellow, then the bee would need to choose the option that was one element less than the sample number to receive a reward. The incorrect option was randomly selected and could be any number from 1 to 5, including the sample number itself that controlled for the bees choosing the correct option based on visual similarity, and incorrect choices were associated with a bitter tasting quinine solution.'

Figure 1:

F1.medium.gif
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Jive Turkey

Karen
6,634
8,799
Eugenics makes POODLES; nature demands wolves.

We made poodles because we aimed to make poodles. If we wanted to select for bad ass man-eaters, we could do that too. We aimed to make pets and we made pets. There's no reason to think poodles should be comparable to wolves
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,926
9,576
No that's NOT why it wouldn't work for humans. We aren't fucking livestock or pets. We have to produce offspring who must COMPETE to carry on our genetic legacy.
With what?

We're increasingly restructuring our environment and steadily eliminating "natural" selection pressures. The simple fact is, our survival and reproduction are no longer constrained by natural circumstances, they're constrained by our technology. We lack vitamin B in our rice diet? Who needs adaptation to vitamin-depleted food, Golden rice, here you go. (once you've successfully ignored the all-natural lobby).
Cows, chickens and poodles no longer have to compete; they just have to be DELICIOUS or adorable. That's because the selective pressures that govern their existence are no longer natural...they live or die depending on artificial human needs.
And the thing is, so do humans. The only difference is that there's no breeder - the state - coming around to specify criteria of selection.
Eugenics or any other kind of socio-genetic engineering would produce humans who are selected for artificial standards of fitness, NOT the nature's unsympathetic rigor. And they'd fare as well as chickens or cows would in competition with buffalos or hawks: not very well at all.
Against who would they compete? Other humans, presumably? The thing is, competition between humans is no longer competition between humans, it's competition between societies and technologies. The "natural" fitness of the humans inside is relatively meaningless.
 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user

3301

Wake Up Man
<Banned>
2,770
1,379
No that's NOT why it wouldn't work for humans. We aren't fucking livestock or pets. We have to produce offspring who must COMPETE to carry on our genetic legacy. Cows, chickens and poodles no longer have to compete; they just have to be DELICIOUS or adorable. That's because the selective pressures that govern their existence are no longer natural...they live or die depending on artificial human needs.

Eugenics or any other kind of socio-genetic engineering would produce humans who are selected for artificial standards of fitness, NOT the nature's unsympathetic rigor. And they'd fare as well as chickens or cows would in competition with buffalos or hawks: not very well at all.

Eugenics makes POODLES; nature demands wolves. A CRISPR-edited society would be pruned of the "harsh edges" that make humans competitive on nature's terms, but less attractive on human terms. They'd make limp-wristed socially-mobile cuckfaggots; more gracious, more "emotionally accessible" and less toxic and abrasive. But then they'd fare about as well as poodles would when the wolves come.

We must remain wolves.

I don't know where you've been, but that whole competition thing has been not a thing since people could use computing devices amongst each other to transmit messages in alphabet characters rather than instant math derivatives or much longer. Today's society is very much of a kept zoo animal. To the point where the other zoo animals are trained to avoid captivity (Khorum penis attacks and resulting subjugation). Case in point, we have zombiewizardhawk zombiewizardhawk in the Coronavirus thread that can't even math up severity over a month, and you're over here talking about poodles when there's:

20161003-093649-anigif_enhanced-14157-1402505330-11gif.gif
 
  • 2Worf
Reactions: 1 users

khorum

Murder Apologist
24,338
81,363
Against who would they compete? Other humans, presumably? The thing is, competition between humans is no longer competition between humans, it's competition between societies and technologies. The "natural" fitness of the humans inside is relatively meaningless.

Yes, other humans. And no competition between humans is STILL very much a competition for animal survival and the propagation of the fittest.

And finally yes, it is VERY MUCH a contest between poodles and wolves. And what you "have inside" is, was, and will always be what matters.

It'll be these guys

186DBEC3-8E8F-4DF1-8CD6-3A24734FEE12.jpeg


versus these guys:

89632950-4A1C-46D9-AA2A-4C98F7594D35.jpeg



Best of luck, poodles.
 

3301

Wake Up Man
<Banned>
2,770
1,379
Yes, other humans. And no competition between humans is STILL very much a competition for animal survival and the propagation of the fittest.

And finally yes, it is VERY MUCH a contest between poodles and wolves. And what you "have inside" is, was, and will always be what matters.

It'll be these guys

View attachment 250221

versus these guys:

View attachment 250222


Best of luck, poodles.

1582193649379.gif

1582193829823.gif
 
  • 1Worf
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

Ukerric

Bearded Ape
<Silver Donator>
7,926
9,576
It'll be these guys

View attachment 250221

versus these guys:

View attachment 250222


Best of luck, poodles.
Wrong. It will be the State that produced those guys vs the State that produced those guys.

Any society in which eugenics is practiced at the level Dawkins says would work is a totalitarian regime that will not hesitate one second to have the chaingun-armed drones open up fire at the frontier, or sterilize anyone they imported for a specific function. The societies that would practice efficient eugenics are more like Domination of the Draka, not weak-willed ones.

Of course, the real reason Dawkins is wrong in practice is the generation time. Eugenic breeding requires dozens of generations without contamination, meaning 3+ centuries at least with an iron control on your population, and a long term plan. It's hard to keep the course for that long. So the real obstacle to breeding humans isn't that it does not work, it's that there's no real breeder to do that.
 
  • 1Worf
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 users

Jive Turkey

Karen
6,634
8,799
Yes, other humans. And no competition between humans is STILL very much a competition for animal survival and the propagation of the fittest.

And finally yes, it is VERY MUCH a contest between poodles and wolves. And what you "have inside" is, was, and will always be what matters.

It'll be these guys

View attachment 250221

versus these guys:

View attachment 250222


Best of luck, poodles.
Doesn’t this undermine your argument though? We don’t have eugenics programs and we still have little twink millennials. They were created by the same pressures that gave us Brock Lesnar. Do you not think breeding the Brock Lesnars of the world with the Cyborg Santoses of the world would result in fewer twink millennial types?