FilterHN

Humans 40k yrs ago developed a system of conventional signs

62 points

by bikenaga

9 hours ago

| past

| 4 comments

| pnas.org

| HN

▲

amatecha

2 hours ago

[-]

The X's on the animal forms (Fig. 1B) ... isn't that likely to be "hit here" type markings, for hunting reference? Shoulder, side, stomach... surprised this wasn't really touched on in the paper, since it seems really likely. Though, the paper doesn't seem to care so much about the actual meanings, seemingly just narrowing down the number of possible interpretations /shrug

▲

shimman

1 hour ago

[-]

Interesting comment, I remember something similar about how researchers thought hairstyles depicted in paintings or statues were unrealistic but it wasn't until a hairstylist pointed out that you can sew the hair together:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/this-woman-is-a-ha...

I've also heard similar stories about people working with leather recognizing some set of artifacts as being more useful for work rather than ceremonial.

Here's of video of creating a roman Vestal Virgins hairstyle:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eA9JYWh1r7U

I bet there are many more similar stories yet to be told.

▲

kazinator

1 hour ago

[-]

> Humans have carved visual signs into the surfaces of mobile artifacts [...]

And, undoubtedly, while doing so, some of them walked into something and got hurt.

▲

WalterBright

3 hours ago

[-]

They could also be simply idle doodling or decorations.

▲

coldtea

7 minutes ago

[-]

Yes, the specialist researchers didn't think of that.

▲

bryanlarsen

3 hours ago

[-]

Too bad we don't have a paper that applies information theory techniques to answer that question. Oh wait...

▲

WalterBright

2 hours ago

[-]

I remain skeptical. Pictures in clouds.

▲

djtango

15 minutes ago

[-]

What are you skeptical about? 40k years ago humans were just as we the humans of today, but they also faced harsher environments to survive in.

Technology has enabled us to compound advanced intergenerationally but I don't really believe we're actually that special when compared to our forebears...

▲

chmod775

4 minutes ago

[-]

Given that pressure from natural selection has lessened a lot, chances are that we are less special now.

Our intellect evolved for survival, but now it's very much optional - has been for many generations. It and may now even be inversely correlated with having offspring.

▲

KevinMS

2 hours ago

[-]

considering there are so many of them I think you are right.

▲

iberator

3 hours ago

[-]

Ha! And someone today at HN laughed at the research of monkeys playing with crystals...

Maybe one day we could communicate with monkeys with marbles and crystals and stuff as SIGN language.

Imagine monkey soldiers becoming reality in AI WARS.

▲

citizenpaul

2 hours ago

[-]

Sorry to be the wet blanket. However research on monkeys/apes has for the most part proven that their intelligence is at a dead end and never can progress past what is basically around human 2yo level.

▲

gerdesj

14 minutes ago

[-]

Please quote your sources regarding monkey and ape intelligence with regards dead ends (whatever that means), wet blanket.

Please also note you are just a wet blanket and not the wet blanket - that epithet is not normally sought after.

▲

Xss3

1 hour ago

[-]

That really depends how you measure and define intelligence and does a disservice to them.

Toddlers for example dont tend to have gang wars for territories and certainly couldnt do battle outcome predictions from a glance at a group across thick canopy and the sounds of branches and hollering.

▲

cwmoore

27 minutes ago

[-]

Teacher wouldn’t allow it.

▲

iwontberude

38 minutes ago

[-]

Apes tend to be way more intelligent than humans of any age about how to hold and consume different vegetables and fruits.

▲

dlisboa

18 minutes ago

[-]

Humans today perhaps. People tend to underestimate our abilities in nature because we’ve evolved to be able to shape it. In reality humans had generationally transmitted oral knowledge of food, plus are the only animals that can transform food at will, including from “toxic” to consumable.

▲

keeganpoppen

2 hours ago

[-]

well that surely seems to be empirically true...