Hacker Neue

Preferences
TechnicalVault parent
The selective pressure of a .338 Winchester Magnum, is not to be underestimated.

Funny thing is something similar occurs in lab mice. Where a technician is selecting a mouse for cull the more aggressive mice are more likely to be the ones selected. Problem mice who kill their littermates can ruin experiments.

asdff
What is interesting is it is happening with urban racoons too. I'm not sure what the selective pressure might be for smaller snouts. I don't think racoons are being killed like a dangerous bear might. I'd assume if any are being actively fed for looking cute it is very few of them, and those doing the feeding wouldn't be selective about it.

My best guess is that the short snout trait is in linkage with something else that is actually what is being selected upon. At least for racoons.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/raccoons-are-show...

raverbashing
One evolutionary pressure that exists in city raccoons is being run over by cars. Others might be access to food, which cute (and less aggressive) raccoons might have an easier time with
setopt
My guess would be a linkage with something else as you say. Look for example at the Russian domestication of silver foxes which was done very deliberately, and bred for less aggressiveness, yet it caused physical changes in appearance like dog-like ears and tails: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox
attila-lendvai
same with russian fox fur breeders. i don't remember the numbers, but after a surprisingly small number of generations the foxes turned into cat-like pets.
pfdietz
Yes, that's a quite famous experiment, and still ongoing. Similar effects of "domestication syndrome" have recently been reported in wild urban foxes and raccoons.
tokai
Remember reading something about humans themselves show the signs of domestication syndrome.
nkrisc
Not in the literal sense (which would semantically impossible), but we have domesticated ourselves with the advent of farming and the domestication of crop plants. We fundamentally changed our own lifestyle into an agricultural one, the same we changed lifestyle of several large mammal species to co-exist with us in that agricultural lifestyle. So perhaps in some sense, maybe we actually did literally domesticated ourselves.
antihipocrat
Wheat, barley and similar plant life have done pretty well for themselves, perhaps they domesticated us?
lisper
A chicken is an egg’s way of making more eggs.
mjanx123
The markers of domestication in modern humans long predate the farming. 'Human' was the first animal available for domestication. There is a distinction between the domestication as set of changes in the organism and the 'applied' domestication in farming. In the applied sense, the humans on the top of the hierarchy do actually farm the humans below them.
verisimi
> Not in the literal sense (which would semantically impossible)

Why is it impossible the humans are not domesticated? Are you making a point about language?

I think this is certainly true. People in cities, where there are high amounts of people around act differently when they are in a small village or in nature with fewer or no people around.

BurningFrog
Executing murderers will change the population over a few centuries.
startupsfail
Yes, executioners do proliferate this way. They tend to run out of murderers quickly though, then use any other excuses to execute.
Earw0rm
Only if they haven't yet reproduced.
pfdietz
I doubt it. The fraction of population that is murderers is quite small.
6 More Comments →
jojobas
It wasn't for fur, they ran a long-term selective breeding experiment just to see if they can pull it off.
dyauspitr
Tails curled, ears drooped and they became mostly white.
0_____0
What portion of lab mice are from genetically stable inbred lines? I assumed most of them were from those lines due to their predictable characteristics. C57BL/6 being predictably kind of bitey for example
andai
I heard the same process has been running on humans for the last few millennia. Apparently 2% of the population was executed every year, wherein presumably the most aggressive and independently-minded individuals are overrepresented.

Something something autodomestication...

lotsofpulp
Wouldn’t the ones doing the executing be the most aggressive?
II2II
I look at aggression as an emotional state, rather than the capacity for violence. Consider the army. Soldiers are expected to commit violent acts on enemy soldiers, yet they are also expected to maintain emotional control. They are typically expected to avoid killing civilians. They are certainly expected to avoid killing friendly targets. Clearly they have a capacity to commit violence and I suppose most people would say there is a need for aggression because of that. On the other hand, they are not aggressive in the sense of random acts of violence (as would be the case of a bear or a raccoon attacking a bystander).
lm28469
It's just a job, and the decision is backed by justice.

The guy who kills a family for fun is more aggressive than the guy who execute him. I'm not even sure how you could get to any other conclusion

lotsofpulp
In that scenario, the guy who kills a family is also an executioner. But in the context of a world where 2% of the population is executed every year, presumably that is one without much of a justice system, and more of a dictatorship (where the dictator and their underlings are pretty aggressive).

Edit: I think "most aggressive and independently-minded individuals" needs to be defined further, because, obviously, a human without a tribe isn't going to survive long, but also no tribe wants an unpredictable wildcard. So one can be aggressive, with long term strategic thinking, but also not impulsive so as to become persona non grata.

An aggressive, long term thinking individual (or group) can cull other "aggressive and independently-minded individuals" so they don't develop into threats.

lm28469
> the guy who kills a family is also an executioner

Quite literally not... "executioner: an official who effects a sentence of capital punishment on a condemned person". An executioner is someone who is legally allowed to give death as a consequence of a judicial decision, not simply someone who kills.

Words have meaning an homicide isn't a murder, a murder isn't an execution, &c.

Ray20
No, they are not. I think, on average, those who execute are much less aggressive than those who are executed.
lotsofpulp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_mortality...

Even in warring countries, or countries without much rule of law, death rates (from all causes) is ~1.1%. Let's say good data is not available, and the real figure is double or triple that number.

An annual death rate of 2% just from executions would be in a society with a super aggressive dictator (or faction, I guess).

For more context, annual WW2 death rates over 5 or 6 years were not as high as 2% per year. Only Poland seems to have been higher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

HPsquared
Every year, or every generation? I could believe 2% per generation.
rendaw
Do lab mice breed after selection for experiments?

This item has no comments currently.

Keyboard Shortcuts

Story Lists

j
Next story
k
Previous story
Shift+j
Last story
Shift+k
First story
o Enter
Go to story URL
c
Go to comments
u
Go to author

Navigation

Shift+t
Go to top stories
Shift+n
Go to new stories
Shift+b
Go to best stories
Shift+a
Go to Ask HN
Shift+s
Go to Show HN

Miscellaneous

?
Show this modal