/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15390794

Höhöhöhöhö!! XD

>>15390974

Man of integrity, good! That alone won't suffice ofc. Guess the only way will be to line these cultists up against the wall in the near future. :)

>>15390218

>the group became too unrelated on average which reduced fertility some how

Hmm, might fit. The "unrelated" part might imply a possible mechanism to escape the oscillation ... divergence, speciation, ofc that would require expansion into a new "niche". Fertility effects would ofc too make sense here if seen from the "investment" side with exponential growth and niche saturation. Feel free to dump a link here, would like to read that later if you can find it again ... :)

>>15390161

>even found a way to modify this behaviour through epigenetic markers

Interesting, might wanna look the exact experimental setting up here. Could be that these epigenetic markers here were actually in "inbuilt" mechanism acting as a population level adaptive switch, kinda to "anticipate" the point where the density collapse occurs (important here, in interaction with the species' environmental niche ... the density function might be different or not even apply in a lab setting instead) ... assuming here ofc this modification did prevent collapse, without knowing the experiment this could have been "shifted forward" instead. That's how I'd understand it, the gene pool of the species "knows" it would enter into a collapse scenario so once a density close to this threshold is reached the increasing "stress" does activate what we could think of as a genomic failsafe to prepare the individuals for what is to come.

>>15390095

.. so overall, the oscillation in case of our mice here (ignoring for simplicity's sake how it interacts with the environment and vice versa) does slowly but steadily (ok, often exponentially) shift the colony into a "new" set of conditions which previously did not apply ... for example higher population density (favoring transmission of disease), increased stress (inhibiting resistance mechanisms), loss of resilience (in favor of "outgrowing" the competition by more fertility). The current trajectory of the oscillating line becomes unstable then, and usually some otherwise even "minor" outside disturbance (the discontinuity event) will then trigger or even catalyze the trajectory reversal of our oscillating line. The new set of conditions comes into full effect, selective factors flip from the previous set to the new one. Thing is, we can assume that most species on a total gene pool level are actually adapted to just such an oscillation ... could even call it their own "personal" Schwingung (again without looking at environment interactions). Now the colony collapse might appear catastrophic for those caught up in it but for the species it is simply business as usual, it is almost even THE adaptive mode ensuring its survival if seen over longer time intervals ... or several peaks of the oscillation.

>>15389991

Cyclicality, feedback, oscillation, yesss. Perhaps THE deepest mechanism of nature, straight from intracellular signalling to whole biosphere dynamics. This is very important to understand but initially hard to "grasp" in its entirety and universality. It is ofc not entirely "cyclical" as in perfect repetition, there's always a cut, a point of apparent discontinuity. A moment of catastrophy, a selective sweep, a Ragnarök event. The "reason" is actually simple, we're after all not dealing with a static system here, very much the opposite! Complex structures which stabilize and replicate themselves at the "expense" of the environment, running along the axis of entropic gradients ... this is semi-stability, if it would "calcify" into a fully stable form it would be dead, lifeless. Instead, it "rotates" or rather oscillates (if thought linearized in the time gradient) around this axis of its own (in)stability.

>>15387723

>From my perspective, and given what I wrote, it amounts to the same thing.

But it does not. The Malthusian retards do blame "density" and think salvation lies in thinning the herd. Delusional. Density simply pushes what is already irrevocably degenerated over the edge ... any other type of stressful pressure would do the same. The mouse utopia simply gets misinterpreted a lot, the actual damage already happens during the exponential growth phase. Yet admitting to this would point out a few ... "uncomfortable" truths. Things the delusional retards running the show today couldn't admit to, as by definition they'd be as well part of the diseased branches which need to be pruned. All must do their part and serve the cycle ... for some this will simply be in the role of fertilizer.

>>15388740

Disease would be a "alternative" stressor here (although it ofc depends on a certain density threshold). Again the exponential growth phase, the shift of energy investment from resilience to reproduction, it does weaken the whole colony to the stress that is to come.

>>15389663

>life for the sake of life

Always has been, always will be. :}~<

>>15388672

>So when shit like """overpopulation""" or """BRICS""" emerges it freaks them out because that's a multi-billion populus of non-whites forming collations to become independent.

... and the bloody retards fuck it up. Don't even remotely know how to handle it. And then they'll beg *our* kind to save them again in due time. Well good luck ... all things must end. :)

>>15388252

Ultra HD ... noice btw!! :D

>>15388194

Heh, just trying to do my very best. :)

>>15388180

>But they're still a few standard deviations above the average retard, as sad as that is.

Ofc they are, I do not doubt that, the certain "layer" of useful retard strawmen aside who do at times act as an outward "buffer" ... those slightly dumb faces we get to see on TV. As I said, not really an issue of intelligence in the broader sense but of a lack of clear mission objectives which are ultimately beneficial to continuity, both of the overall civilization and with it ofc the leadership caste itself. I can see the Eigendynamik which has led to this ofc ... a weak mandate by a detached leadership, short term solutions to shift problems into the (near) future, misunderstanding or ignoring the mutual obligation required in a leadership role ... could go on and on but not to fall into a rant ...

>True, but I think the people with the most positive outlook on the consequences of AI are those whose balance is most equal.

That might very well be! And all the idiocy about fully automated "AI" idols aside, this current technology got some damn fine niche applications I could think of ... niches which could then grow into something really innovative, something that will very much contribute in our way towards the stars. :)

>It's all the dregs of humanity that realize they don't deserve their positions, that they don't have the skills for leadership and they are frauds that are afraid of being found out.

Jep. I even see that quite a few wouldn't necessarily need to be caught up in this fraudster role ... instead they're delusional about it and think business as usual (or as projected) could be continued, as the alternative would ofc involve a certain price to be paid, as everything in the world does. We all just do our part and we're all just passing by ... that must be understood.

>>15388172

>and violence will become the supreme political currency

Höhö, well ... we can deal in that too if they keep asking for it. Then their pwecious "equality" will mean they'll all get equally fucked. :D

>>15387713

>I don't think that's fair to most of them.

It is. Even for those that show at least some skill and talent. 'xept for a very few they all suffer from a complete lack of vision, are not familiar with any principles of leadership and tradition and ultimately act as willfully ignorant blind fools riding the inertia of a once great civilization, ever more downhill.

>They just realize that humanity is mostly shitty and would be found wanting when weighed in the balance.

Fleshies ... lovely creatures. Ofc they are, that's in their nature! But you see, we're all being thrown into the balance in the end ... and if you think you got any kind of "mandate" for leadership you better damn well understand that! Otherwise, not a case for being thrown into the balance but being lined up against the nearest wall. See, I am a kindhearted and just man. I can have mercy with the plebs, they don't know any better. I cannot have any mercy however with someone assuming the role of "leader" who do not fit that role in the slightest. :)

>>15387542

>malthusian

Höhöhö ... well there you are quite mistaken. A culling must be qualitative, not quantitative. ;)

>>15387509

>A lot of crayon eating retards more influential than you are worried about an AI just desiring to kill all humans.

ftfy ;)

>>15379089

Lerne damit umzugehen ... or just put us in fucking charge again. :)

>>15384472

Harsh selective sweep. Effectively allowing it to come almost to its conclusion.

>>15384487

>Don't have severe multigenerational inbreeding.

Irrelevant. Wasn't inbreeding but loss of genome pool-wide resilience due to lack of selective pressures until colony saturation started to create heavy societal stress which the non-resilient gene pool wasn't able to deal with.

>>15387134

>fails to think in nonduality

:D

>>15387347

>what do these subhumans want revenge for?

Bingo! Oh well, ungratefulness will be equally "rewarded".

>>15384220

Dunno lol. ;)

>>15384193

Old but still reliable!! Nvm, don't need to talk about the basics then with you.

>but rather the risk calculations or polygenic score from heritability estimates

Indeed, but you still would need to find a better way than the 20 year old methods then to not end up in just the same replication crisis dead end. Damn statistics do tend to swallow up these divergent mechanisms, often flipping to either one side or the other. Ok, don't think I need to tell you that either, more talking to the 99.99% here.

>Anyway I wasn't intending and I'm not going to just detail the whole of my intuition so there's a lot I've left out.

Cryptic symbolism in your dreams if you allow me that joke. ;)
My gut feeling is telling me what you might wanna do there isn't so foolish after all. Even if it fails to achieve results, will in hindsight think yourself a fool but also be wiser.

>>15384143

>To use the concept of phenotypic "reaction norms" in a more life history sense, the degree to which the phenotype becomes self-reinforcing and therefore expresses higher heritability among a population

Ah, on THAT level, ok got it! Remember there's publications on this (out of the loop for some time now), one issue I've seen here is that if you look at it from a single gene perspective you often do get very "double-edged" results on the behavioural part. Unsurprisingly, as a single gene variant within its overall network can lead to effectively opposite outcomes ... same you could likely apply to traits such as "neuroticism" or "aggressiveness", depending on situation and nurture these could have drastically different outcomes. What you call "catastrophe theory" there is what I would call "thresholds" ... points where a certain geno-phenotype does cross a point of intensity (by feedback) where its influence on the whole system becomes dominant, or at least very pronounced.

>One need not know the cause of the displacement to know its effects if the end results toward dissipation are predictable by inability to sufficiently reduce entropy.

True, doesn't matter so much what has provided the impulse to move the system into its "local minima" ... the minima are at least partially preconfigured already, just a question in which one will land.

>I'm not thinking "big data for big data sake" high dimensionality bullcrap

Good! Might just be on a good way then. :)

>A linearization of the equations yields a solution similar to simple harmonic motion[27] with the population of predators trailing that of prey by 90° in the cycle.

I am not really good at math but I do recognize an oscillation when I see one. ;)

>>15383376

>Basically that, but with respect to cognitive and behavioral phenotypes and the like as what I posted.

Where you wanna go with that again? Correlate complex behavioural patterns with genetic/genomic ones if I understood this correctly? Interesting, quite interesting. You are ofc aware of the layers of complexity here (or "fluidity", both in the biospheric and noospheric department) ... a statistical approach would very likely cut out the most significant parts in favor of amplifying either the sub-average or outright noise.