/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15782540
I can't believe I didn't see this before.
There will only be short men and tall women in the near future. You shouldn't feel justified in stopping this from happening

>>15146892
Your future

>>15131685
The transcript is too long sadly. Just listen it's about 2 or 3 minutes of explanation about how the properties of different materials and hardware affect compute within a given volume

>>15074018
I'm not coping about anything. Humans will be genetically modified to express extreme female biased size dimorphism by the end of the decade.

I was thinking about this ontology stuff for a little while and I don't think it makes a difference. Whether or not the particles are matter or ideal or whatever doesn't really make a difference.

Like, what difference does it make if we call stuff "matter" vs "information" vs "ideals" or whatever? Like what is the ACTUAL difference between any form of monism? If you're claiming that everything is just one type of stuff that adds up together into different patterns or whatever then I see no reason why it matters if we call the stuff matter vs information vs mathematical platonic forms vs ideas in the mind of God or whatever. Theyre all the same thing at that point

>>14947249
>You are. It's still prone to errors.
Less than 1% now
>Not to mention your desire to edit for things that don't have full basis in understanding, such as mate preferences.
Preference for large size in males is not genetic, it is a socialized beauty norm. You are not "genetically predisposed" to need to feel small to feel feminine or whatever it is that you feel, that's a social thing that was put into you by society. It doesn't matter anymore.

>It was better when it was comic relief.
I have never been comic relief, or I should say that while you are completely in your right to think that what I say is funny, it isn't going to change the reality that we WILL genetically modify women to be big and superfecund and men to be small and super athletic.

Small men are superior to large ones in every meaningful respect while being cheaper to maintain. Small, 4 foot tall super athletic males are substantially better at modern combat with firearms, they can perform all the labor needed, they require less than half the calories, etc. A society of these guys would absolutely FUCK a society of big "men" and to be honest femanon, it doesn't matter if you'd prefer the large ones in this case. Society and the species as a whole is more important than your preference for height in males.

Giant superfecund women can support the production of litters with their big bodies, so the fecundity of the society is substantially superior to any other societies. the society would expand and dominate the genepool very easily.

How does this not excite you?

>>14854441
I'm a graduate student studying computational genomics
Time for me to go now, have an angry day anon lol

>>14826546
>It's like denying existence of oxygen because phlogiston was proven not to exist
It isn't quite like that, both phlogiston and elan vital were shown to not be necessary. It could be the case that consciousness is also like this, and we wont need to posit a consciousness field or something to explain it.
I think the argument is okay although we don't know yet. For now, I agree with Witten. I guess we'll see

the future of us horny monkeys

>>14537839
I will build the amazon matriarchy, and usher in the age of Aquarius (age of the water bearer, the woman), and the world will know peace.

>>14514999
There will only be tall thick women with large mammaries (and hips) and small lean men in like ~15 years