Page 10 of 22 « First 89 10 111220 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
daperl's Avatar
daperl is offline daperl
2009-08-04 , 23:50
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#91
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
But now we're getting VERY off topic...
Bummer, 'cause I thought things were just getting good.

If I take away a birds ability to make a nest, would that keep them from surviving? Let's say the answer is yes, and for the continued sake of argument, let's tightly couple birds and their nests as part of their DNA makeup. Isn't it then also fair to say that a human in a space suite or in a bathyscaphe is still surviving within their DNA makeup? If so, I think the vacuum of space and the bottom of Marianas Trench are very harsh environments, and, as far as I know, only humans have gone to both of those places and survived.
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
 
mullf's Avatar
mullf is offline mullf
2009-08-05 , 00:04
Posts: 610 | Thanked: 391 times | Joined on Feb 2006 @ DC, USA
#92
Originally Posted by daperl View Post
At every turn where human DNA has needed to make a decision, it has always chosen the least specific solution.
How does DNA make a decision?


Originally Posted by daperl View Post
Think of all the species whose DNA make that one wrong specific decision, they're either extinct or they're stuck.
The lineages of every other non-extinct species have adapted to their environment satisfactorily enough to still be around.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by daperl View Post
Because of our relative continued ease to generally adapt, we gave our brain the needed breathing room for some accelerated evolving
Favorable climate conditions and other factors such as the cooking of food has contributed to the greater time our species has had for thinking, too. And I don't know what you mean by "accelerated evolving". If we are smart enough to adapt to different environments with our brains, that LESSENS the potential for evolution, since we mitigate the need for physical changes to the genome to adapt to the new environment.
__________________
Nokia 770 Internet Tablet = best device ever made

Deuteronomy 13:6-10; 2 Kings 2:23-24; Judges 19:22-29
 

The Following User Says Thank You to mullf For This Useful Post:
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2009-08-05 , 00:27
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#93
Originally Posted by daperl View Post
Bummer, 'cause I thought things were just getting good.

If I take away a birds ability to make a nest, would that keep them from surviving? Let's say the answer is yes, and for the continued sake of argument, let's tightly couple birds and their nests as part of their DNA makeup. Isn't it then also fair to say that a human in a space suite or in a bathyscaphe is still surviving within their DNA makeup? If so, I think the vacuum of space and the bottom of Marianas Trench are very harsh environments, and, as far as I know, only humans have gone to both of those places and survived.
Yes: but for how long?

You appear to be assuming a managed catastrophe with regards to environment change-- but history shows that there have been cases of severe and sudden changes that overhauled the balance of life. Ergo, punctuated equilibrium.

Dinosaurs were highly viable once, too. I'll be that they even had intelligence potential.

And don't forget that across the spectrum of animal life on earth, the majority of DNA is shared. We don't have a monopoly on mutable genes.

If the planet was abruptly and totally flooded by some means, we're gone. Poof. Why? Because we currently have no ocean-dwelling cultures. (note: I don't believe the biblical flood covered 100% of the planet's surface). In this scenario, dolphins win. We had our shot.

There is evidence of a population bottleneck tens of thousands of years ago. DNA statistically suggests that we were down to 5000 individuals. That was just enough for mankind to survive. A little less, and we would not have had the population depth to make it. So a handful of lucky global catastrophe survivors in wetsuits or space suits aren't gonna cut it.

Hey, I want us to keep going too! I just don't believe we are the automatic end-all, be-all. I believe that the only thing keeping other species from advancing is us: apes, elephants, octupii, whales and dolphins all exhibit the potential to evolve further. But we prevent it. Knock us down a peg or two, and THEIR DNA takes advantage.

Evolution personified would have been stupid not to have a backup plan.

I do believe there is a forward pressure on DNA to ensure intelligent life in spite of entropy. What that force is I have no idea. But I get the feeling it really doesn't care what form that intelligent life takes, as long as it can observe the cosmos. JMHO.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Texrat For This Useful Post:
daperl's Avatar
daperl is offline daperl
2009-08-05 , 01:16
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#94
He lives! Doesn't your day job have something to do with gene sequencing equipment?

Originally Posted by mullf View Post
How does DNA make a decision?
Flips a coin?

The lineages of every other non-extinct species have adapted to their environment satisfactorily enough to still be around.
Maybe I'm looking for some objective way to determine a species-specific survival health index, which I'm sure already exists. And after the algorithm to determine that was agreed upon, my premise would be that the human index would be off the charts while all others would be relatively bunched up.

Favorable climate conditions and other factors such as the cooking of food has contributed to the greater time our species has had for thinking, too. And I don't know what you mean by "accelerated evolving". If we are smart enough to adapt to different environments with our brains, that LESSENS the potential for evolution, since we mitigate the need for physical changes to the genome to adapt to the new environment.
Accelerated evolving, yeah, that sounds particularly lame. I meant above the neck relative to below the neck. And I agree with your last sentence.
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
 
daperl's Avatar
daperl is offline daperl
2009-08-05 , 01:30
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#95
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
There is evidence of a population bottleneck tens of thousands of years ago. DNA statistically suggests that we were down to 5000 individuals.
I'm not saying the road wasn't bumpy and that there wasn't any luck involved, but when you routinely leave the atmosphere while at the same time having seemingly out of control population growth while already over 6.4 billion, can't we say we've reached some milestone?
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
 
Texrat's Avatar
Texrat is offline Texrat
2009-08-05 , 01:34
Posts: 11,700 | Thanked: 10,045 times | Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA
#96
Originally Posted by daperl View Post
I'm not saying the road wasn't bumpy and that there wasn't any luck involved, but when you routinely leave the atmosphere while at the same time having seemingly out of control population growth while already over 6.4 billion, can't we say we've reached some milestone?
Oh hell yes. But I thought we were talking about surviving global catastrophe, not outer space joyrides and a mad race to overpopulate the planet.

Who was the science fiction writer who said there are only two natural courses for us from here on? Either move into space or blow ourselves up? His opinion was that one of those outcomes explained why space telescopes haven't picked up any alien chatter yet.
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
 
daperl's Avatar
daperl is offline daperl
2009-08-05 , 01:43
Posts: 2,427 | Thanked: 2,986 times | Joined on Dec 2007
#97
@Texrat

Sorry for the last post. Again, I don't want to cherry pick, but you're making too many points that I want to respond to and I just can't keep up. So, I won't say anything new, and I'll start an off topic thread when I'm able to respond.
__________________
N9: Go white or go home
 
mullf's Avatar
mullf is offline mullf
2009-08-05 , 01:47
Posts: 610 | Thanked: 391 times | Joined on Feb 2006 @ DC, USA
#98
Originally Posted by daperl View Post
He lives! Doesn't your day job have something to do with gene sequencing equipment?
No, you must be thinking of someone else.


Originally Posted by daperl View Post
Flips a coin?
There is no decision-making involved. Random mutations occur, and they and the individuals with those mutations either do well or do not do well due to the combination of the features of the individuals with the mutation and the environment that they live in. If they do well their numbers increase due to their survival, if not the opposite occurs. There is no decision-making to choose mutations or select mutations that have occurred for possible future environmental changes. The selection is due to the environment at the time. Now, certain changes might be helpful in different environments, but that is just dumb luck. If we are more adaptable than most, that is not due to some decision to make us so.
__________________
Nokia 770 Internet Tablet = best device ever made

Deuteronomy 13:6-10; 2 Kings 2:23-24; Judges 19:22-29
Last edited by mullf; 2009-08-05 at 01:59.
 
mullf's Avatar
mullf is offline mullf
2009-08-05 , 01:49
Posts: 610 | Thanked: 391 times | Joined on Feb 2006 @ DC, USA
#99
Originally Posted by daperl View Post
but when you routinely leave the atmosphere
While each time poking small holes in the atmosphere. Smart.



Originally Posted by daperl View Post
while at the same time having seemingly out of control population growth while already over 6.4 billion, can't we say we've reached some milestone?
Insanity?
__________________
Nokia 770 Internet Tablet = best device ever made

Deuteronomy 13:6-10; 2 Kings 2:23-24; Judges 19:22-29
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mullf For This Useful Post:
ragnar is offline ragnar
2009-08-05 , 10:51
Posts: 631 | Thanked: 1,123 times | Joined on Sep 2005 @ Helsinki
#100
Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
I'll only speak to the US market. The potential fix was in the feedback. Not just the stuff I was mining but info made readily available from a variety of sources. Demographic data that revealed to not just Nokia but any potential supplier just what American citizens wanted. Our surveys were flawed (the ones I saw) but even worse was our advertising-- nearly non-existant and poor when it was there. But customers, nonetheless, were talking.

Apple listened. RIM listened. Nokia shut its collective ears, and let those two seize a market it should have owned, in blinding speed.
Yes, it probably is a question of perspective. From what I and we are sitting, the lack of feedback isn't in the top 5... or top 25 of problems that I would list to be most critical for us or for Nokia. Unfortunately I can't really write the top 5 here or to any public forum.

There's ... I don't want to say that there's too much feedback, but anyway there is wealth of feedback available for us. From so many different sources. Then again of course there is always the question of whose feedback should you listen to and whose not, and there everyone can have their own opinion. (Then again, this of course is a part of the problem.)

You cannot listen or react to everything, otherwise that would take all of your time plus all the conflicting feedback wouldn't actually help anything. Anyways, I wouldn't say that the main problem is that we wouldn't know or have the understanding on what the end result should really be like. But as everyone everyone understands, awareness isn't the final step in any twelve (or 5-step ) program.

Originally Posted by Texrat View Post
Ragnar, many of the details are things you and I can only discuss in certain confines, certainly not in a public forum-- because what I have to say reveals far too much about Nokia internals. So hopefully you and I can talk in Amsterdam if my sponsorship is approved?
Let's see if I'm coming there. Quim, any chance for me?
 
Reply
Page 10 of 22 « First 89 10 111220 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:25.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top