Forwarded from belalial
golden piece from ycombinator comment section:
> What could a smarter tree do to outcompete rivals?
This may represent a limited understanding of Darwinian evolution.
Trees have an economy, sharing resources with each other and with other living things.
Tree also are (more or less) fixed in place, thus these economic games are repeated games with known participants.
They thus have a vested interest in maximizing the wealth of the community, rather than their individual wealth. They may (and studies suggest they do) have a preference for supporting their offspring over other trees, but not to the point of killing the community their offspring will also depend on.
Where I am going with this. Repeated economic games are not zero-sum; the pie can get bigger. "Competition" in this setting does not look like competition in a zero-sum "I have to beat the other guy" game.
What trees can do with their intelligence is learn how to build long-term stable and nuturing communities which generate substantial wealth for many members. And that this is a logical local (perhaps global) optimium.
> What could a smarter tree do to outcompete rivals?
This may represent a limited understanding of Darwinian evolution.
Trees have an economy, sharing resources with each other and with other living things.
Tree also are (more or less) fixed in place, thus these economic games are repeated games with known participants.
They thus have a vested interest in maximizing the wealth of the community, rather than their individual wealth. They may (and studies suggest they do) have a preference for supporting their offspring over other trees, but not to the point of killing the community their offspring will also depend on.
Where I am going with this. Repeated economic games are not zero-sum; the pie can get bigger. "Competition" in this setting does not look like competition in a zero-sum "I have to beat the other guy" game.
What trees can do with their intelligence is learn how to build long-term stable and nuturing communities which generate substantial wealth for many members. And that this is a logical local (perhaps global) optimium.
❤19👍4🥰2
Forwarded from Hacker News
👍5
Forwarded from Architector #4 but it's a channel (Architector #4)
Twitter
Paris just announced plans to ban private cars in the city centre.
Don't let anyone tell you it can't be done. Congestion is not inevitable, pollution is not inevitable, climate chaos is not inevitable.
#ActOnClimate #climate #energy #ItCanBeDone #GreenNewDeal
Don't let anyone tell you it can't be done. Congestion is not inevitable, pollution is not inevitable, climate chaos is not inevitable.
#ActOnClimate #climate #energy #ItCanBeDone #GreenNewDeal
🥰23👍8
Forwarded from belalial
Beyond Species: The Psychology of the Meat Paradox
Episode webpage: https://anchor.fm/beyondspecies/episodes/The-Psychology-of-the-Meat-Paradox-e1h6k2f
Media file: https://anchor.fm/s/90f5e1b0/podcast/play/50597391/https%3A%2F%2Fd3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.net%2Fstaging%2F2022-3-14%2F259791148-44100-2-c9a91561e166aec7.mp3
Episode webpage: https://anchor.fm/beyondspecies/episodes/The-Psychology-of-the-Meat-Paradox-e1h6k2f
Media file: https://anchor.fm/s/90f5e1b0/podcast/play/50597391/https%3A%2F%2Fd3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.net%2Fstaging%2F2022-3-14%2F259791148-44100-2-c9a91561e166aec7.mp3
Anchor
The Psychology of the Meat Paradox by Beyond Species
Episode 33. In this episode, we hear from Rebecca, whose research at Lancaster University takes a closer look at the meat paradox. Rebecca explains some of the psychological mechanisms people use to justify their meat eating. Rebecca’s research investigates…
👍2